Of course the NYTM is "only" "a part of" the NY tech community.
No one has suggested otherwise (certainly not me - EVER). And with some optimism and generosity, I think you could interpret Scott's infamous sign-off as more of a rallying cry than a claim. "We are the NY tech community, Gruen!"
It's exciting to know there are many groups gathering to see how the NY tech industry can improve. Conversations about our industry, whether in a Google Group or around a beer-stocked-table, are positive. Let's celebrate that fact and not be worried about it.
Actions and clear vision are also helpful, since conversations inspire but don't get the work done. Having many people and many groups working to enhance the industry is also a great thing.
So, this is why I succumbed to taking the NYTM post. I was convinced -- by others -- that my actions and vision would be beneficial to the community and additive to everything else going on. People also knew I'd include as many open minded people as possible.
...and I'm already loving working with those open minded and passionate people.
Nate
PS: 35 people just stepped up to be on the NYTM Community Committee. How awesome is that? Considering several had only been to one or two NYTM events ever, I think is speaks wonders about the community as a whole, not the wee-little NYTM itself.
Matt
· 11 months ago
I think at the end of the day, the "Tech scene" is a collection of individuals who should be able to opt-in and opt-out of meetups, conversations, and dialogues as they want to. The fact that organizations do exist to help foster their own personal and professional growth, but people should always have the opportunity to involve themselves as much as they feel comfortable. I believe that everything from a cup of a coffee among two technologists, a loose confederation of people informally chatting, all the way up to NYTM, and Web 2.0 meetup and Mashable events constitutes the "tech community". I don't think these conversations need a leader, rather I've found the organic ones have tended to have the most positive impact on my life and career.
ceonyc
· 11 months ago
"Joining the existing conversation would be a great start."
You might try some of that yourself.
Last time we chatted, you told me that nothing good ever came out of nextNY, a group with 2000+ members that's been around since... hmm... about 4 months before you finished college. Same goes for Richie's little ad-hoc group--which totally ignored the fact that community leader conversations have been going on for *years*--longer than most of you guys came on the scene. Nate and I brought together a similar council over a year ago--with people Richie isn't even aware of because he's simply not as tapped in as he thinks. I don't think you guys come within a football field of understanding the various groups that make up the community.
It's terrifically amusing when people just anoint themselves "community leaders" and get annoyed when other people don't legitimize them by taking part in the same discussions others have already been having for years.
The fact of the matter is that those involved in the NYTM are more representative of the NY Tech Community than any other group out there--especially when you take into consideration the diversity of networks they bring to the table.
It's not about who's on the list or who isn't... or how many people show up. That's a very narrow minded view. It's that most of the influencers and real innovators in the community are within one degree from the Meetup, and that can't really be said for any other group--so, yes, I think that's very representative.
No, it's not every single tech employee in NYC gathering at CitiField, but it's a terrifically good proxy for the community and getting better everyday.
It makes no sense to have a NYTM rep at your meeting... b/c what is your meeting... a proxy for community leadership? Really? A better one than NYTM is? How old is it? How many people does it represent?
Don't confuse yourself... Just because it isn't "outward reaching" specifically to you, doesn't mean it isn't outward reaching. Perhaps your gold embossed hand written invitation just got lost in the mail. Five hundred other people who enthusiastically recognize this community's value didn't need one to show up and participate.
Michael E. Gruen
· 11 months ago
Charlie--
Last time we spoke, we touched on NextNY; but, like the margaritas floating amongst the crowd, such statements go best with a grain of salt. (And, perhaps, an explanation the morning after.)
Like you, I, too, find self-appointed community leaders terrifically amusing. But, “Richie’s little ad-hoc group” isn’t Richie’s little ad-hoc group; he merely felt compelled to get a conversation going. He is by no means the leader of it– neither am I. (Of the dozen or so involved, the median age is pushing 40.) Inasmuch, it’s certainly not my meeting.
Much of the discussion focused around where other community leader initiatives failed, how to can go about fixing it, and what organizations, companies, and groups would be interested and in what capacity. Given that the NYTM election was the impetus for the meeting and that the winning candidate’s platform echoed such an effort, it’s interesting how inconsequential it seemed to him.
But, to the point, my contention is merely that the NYTM bills itself (purposefully or not) as the representation of the New York Technology community; and, while it may be representative, it’s not an official, elected, community-recognized representing body for all of New York technology.
Ultimately, the initiative is not about egos; it’s about getting it right. NYTM may be the platform and become the leadership; but, then again, it may not be. I’m happy that Nate and NYTM have evangelized the cause– I’m just questioning the approach, attitude, and scope.
In that vein, I am more than happy to help by serving on Nate’s to-be-formed 15ish-person committee because I think the meet-up serves an important function. And, like many, I would like to see it do more.
You mentioned that you and Nate attempted to start a council. What happened, and what can we, as a community, learn from it?
ceonyc
· 11 months ago
*Disqus would make this go a lot easier... so I don't have to keep coming back here to comment. It lets you just respond to the comment notification e-mail. *
We didn't attempt to start a council. We brought people together to talk. It was a great meeting and great relationships came of it....so...it was a success.
I think the tech community has done an amazing job of organizing itself over the last five years. I don't buy into the idea that its broken. Instead of just sitting on the sidelines and questioning...why arent you the NYTM's most active participant? Create change from the inside. Make it what you want it to be. I question people who think solutions start with directing attention away from where there is already momentum.
"it’s not an official, elected, community-recognized representing body for all of New York technology."
The only people who are really interested in that are people who want a title, because no one who is already working to create community sees this as necessary to getting anything done. If anything, it's less likely to get anything done. What exactly would this get accomplished that you think needs to get accomplished? Start with an end goal, and then figure out what the best means are to accomplish this... don't start with structure and then figure out what to do with it. That's a bridge to nowhere.
Nate got dragged into running....Honestly, he wasnt going to do it until I, and others) basically forced his hand because we believed he had enough experience with the community to have the right approach. (Of course, now he's glad. ) I felt like a lot of the other folks wanted to win something and Nate's always just wanted to build community, title or not. You shouldn't have to be on this committee to actively bring the community together. No reason why you can't hit up the NYTM list and just say "Hey...here's an effort I'm trying to get off the ground...here's a good idea that needs some support, etc..."
The worst thing about this community it is that not enough of the key people know each other...but that will get solved in time...and its already improving. I got a dozen+ partner level people from VC firms out at the @shakeshack event this summer to mix with hundreds of other folks from the community. That's probably the first time they've all been at the same event together.
It won't improve with more structure though. It improves with people on the ground dragging their friends out to places, running events, etc.....and not just more drinkups with really junior folks. I'm talking opportunities for productive discussion and feedback with people who run stuff and have a lot of experience.
sarahcooley
· 11 months ago
I went and added disqus just for you :)
ceonyc
· 11 months ago
Trust me... when you're able to respond to comments via e-mail, you'll realize what you were missing.
But thank you!
sarahcooley
· 11 months ago
I believe you, and hey, if it helps the conversation it is good right?
All Comments
Of course the NYTM is "only" "a part of" the NY tech community.
No one has suggested otherwise (certainly not me - EVER). And with some optimism and generosity, I think you could interpret Scott's infamous sign-off as more of a rallying cry than a claim.
"We are the NY tech community, Gruen!"
It's exciting to know there are many groups gathering to see how the NY tech industry can improve. Conversations about our industry, whether in a Google Group or around a beer-stocked-table, are positive. Let's celebrate that fact and not be worried about it.
Actions and clear vision are also helpful, since conversations inspire but don't get the work done. Having many people and many groups working to enhance the industry is also a great thing.
So, this is why I succumbed to taking the NYTM post. I was convinced -- by others -- that my actions and vision would be beneficial to the community and additive to everything else going on. People also knew I'd include as many open minded people as possible.
...and I'm already loving working with those open minded and passionate people.
Nate
PS: 35 people just stepped up to be on the NYTM Community Committee. How awesome is that? Considering several had only been to one or two NYTM events ever, I think is speaks wonders about the community as a whole, not the wee-little NYTM itself.
You might try some of that yourself.
Last time we chatted, you told me that nothing good ever came out of nextNY, a group with 2000+ members that's been around since... hmm... about 4 months before you finished college. Same goes for Richie's little ad-hoc group--which totally ignored the fact that community leader conversations have been going on for *years*--longer than most of you guys came on the scene. Nate and I brought together a similar council over a year ago--with people Richie isn't even aware of because he's simply not as tapped in as he thinks. I don't think you guys come within a football field of understanding the various groups that make up the community.
It's terrifically amusing when people just anoint themselves "community leaders" and get annoyed when other people don't legitimize them by taking part in the same discussions others have already been having for years.
The fact of the matter is that those involved in the NYTM are more representative of the NY Tech Community than any other group out there--especially when you take into consideration the diversity of networks they bring to the table.
It's not about who's on the list or who isn't... or how many people show up. That's a very narrow minded view. It's that most of the influencers and real innovators in the community are within one degree from the Meetup, and that can't really be said for any other group--so, yes, I think that's very representative.
No, it's not every single tech employee in NYC gathering at CitiField, but it's a terrifically good proxy for the community and getting better everyday.
It makes no sense to have a NYTM rep at your meeting... b/c what is your meeting... a proxy for community leadership? Really? A better one than NYTM is? How old is it? How many people does it represent?
Don't confuse yourself... Just because it isn't "outward reaching" specifically to you, doesn't mean it isn't outward reaching. Perhaps your gold embossed hand written invitation just got lost in the mail. Five hundred other people who enthusiastically recognize this community's value didn't need one to show up and participate.
Last time we spoke, we touched on NextNY; but, like the margaritas floating amongst the crowd, such statements go best with a grain of salt. (And, perhaps, an explanation the morning after.)
Like you, I, too, find self-appointed community leaders terrifically amusing. But, “Richie’s little ad-hoc group” isn’t Richie’s little ad-hoc group; he merely felt compelled to get a conversation going. He is by no means the leader of it– neither am I. (Of the dozen or so involved, the median age is pushing 40.) Inasmuch, it’s certainly not my meeting.
Much of the discussion focused around where other community leader initiatives failed, how to can go about fixing it, and what organizations, companies, and groups would be interested and in what capacity. Given that the NYTM election was the impetus for the meeting and that the winning candidate’s platform echoed such an effort, it’s interesting how inconsequential it seemed to him.
But, to the point, my contention is merely that the NYTM bills itself (purposefully or not) as the representation of the New York Technology community; and, while it may be representative, it’s not an official, elected, community-recognized representing body for all of New York technology.
Ultimately, the initiative is not about egos; it’s about getting it right. NYTM may be the platform and become the leadership; but, then again, it may not be. I’m happy that Nate and NYTM have evangelized the cause– I’m just questioning the approach, attitude, and scope.
In that vein, I am more than happy to help by serving on Nate’s to-be-formed 15ish-person committee because I think the meet-up serves an important function. And, like many, I would like to see it do more.
You mentioned that you and Nate attempted to start a council. What happened, and what can we, as a community, learn from it?
We didn't attempt to start a council. We brought people together to talk. It was a great meeting and great relationships came of it....so...it was a success.
I think the tech community has done an amazing job of organizing itself over the last five years. I don't buy into the idea that its broken. Instead of just sitting on the sidelines and questioning...why arent you the NYTM's most active participant? Create change from the inside. Make it what you want it to be. I question people who think solutions start with directing attention away from where there is already momentum.
"it’s not an official, elected, community-recognized representing body for all of New York technology."
The only people who are really interested in that are people who want a title, because no one who is already working to create community sees this as necessary to getting anything done. If anything, it's less likely to get anything done. What exactly would this get accomplished that you think needs to get accomplished? Start with an end goal, and then figure out what the best means are to accomplish this... don't start with structure and then figure out what to do with it. That's a bridge to nowhere.
Nate got dragged into running....Honestly, he wasnt going to do it until I, and others) basically forced his hand because we believed he had enough experience with the community to have the right approach. (Of course, now he's glad. ) I felt like a lot of the other folks wanted to win something and Nate's always just wanted to build community, title or not. You shouldn't have to be on this committee to actively bring the community together. No reason why you can't hit up the NYTM list and just say "Hey...here's an effort I'm trying to get off the ground...here's a good idea that needs some support, etc..."
The worst thing about this community it is that not enough of the key people know each other...but that will get solved in time...and its already improving. I got a dozen+ partner level people from VC firms out at the @shakeshack event this summer to mix with hundreds of other folks from the community. That's probably the first time they've all been at the same event together.
It won't improve with more structure though. It improves with people on the ground dragging their friends out to places, running events, etc.....and not just more drinkups with really junior folks. I'm talking opportunities for productive discussion and feedback with people who run stuff and have a lot of experience.
But thank you!