A continuing and repeated conversation at the IA summit in Baltimore this week is about knowing how to say what you think you can say about the things you'd like to say.
That can be having a bazillion drafts of blog posts that you think nobody is ever going to want to read, or wondering whether anyone in their right mind would sit through 45 minutes of you telling them how you actually have no idea what you're talking about but that's alright because you're not about to change the world with your reimagineeration of practice fundamentals you just did a thing recently that included some of the stuff that everybody here also seems to be doing but you weren't sure whether you were doing the right IA thing and actually you weren't even sure it was IA at all but, like, it was just a good story about how I did a thing which you think is a bit like how other people do a thing and perhaps is would be interesting to other people to see how I did it you know like let's understand how we actually do what we do with the things we know and see if we might learn something or validate an approach or find a different way to do it rather that necessarily trying to understand how calling something a fish means I've subconsciously induced a cognitive brain spasm which can be expressed as an inducement to a systemic failure in brain pattern structure mapping that is an unavoidable and not entirely unexpected relation of disentropy that exposes your failing as a labelling person to understand the role of that artefact in the ontology of the universe of stuffz.
We want to hear and read and see and discuss that stuff. We just want you to tell a story about what you've been doing. It's pretty simple. I mean, we like the big crazy things, but there's nothing like a good story, well told, about a personal experience, that helps us say YES I DO THAT TOO.