Ultimately, I'm sorry you didn't like it, but it's disingenuous for you to paint it as a failure.
Fair enough, but I just felt like painting another picture.
If I were to offer two core criticisms of the session (as I experienced it), it would be
1. that it got sort of repetitive after a while.
2. It was a constant stream of information, a constant stream of how, without any context, or small breaks where you got explained what just happened or what we were about to do. Lots of how. No why.
Without a "why", "how" will much more quickly turn "too much how". While these are just my 2 cents, I think there is some objective lessons to be learned at the bottom of this as well.
Fair enough, but I just felt like painting another picture.
If I were to offer two core criticisms of the session (as I experienced it), it would be
1. that it got sort of repetitive after a while. 2. It was a constant stream of information, a constant stream of how, without any context, or small breaks where you got explained what just happened or what we were about to do. Lots of how. No why.
Without a "why", "how" will much more quickly turn "too much how". While these are just my 2 cents, I think there is some objective lessons to be learned at the bottom of this as well.
Still. I'll give you credit for not being a cliché at the conference. You are always willing to try something new and for that I admire you.