I was pleased on the day when I realised I was far from alone in that respect.

As Liam says, I think it was a good event overall… next time I’ll skip the speeches (if they’re silly enough to do the same structure), as although a few of them were good, most of them were pointless time-fillers. The workshops and the random conversations were the meat of the day, and they were well worth the entry fee on their own.

This piece highlights the divisions at the event incredibly well, but on some level, one of the advantages to the more networked approach to movement building, is that we’re quite good at adapting to less-than-ideal situations, such as the structure of the day itself.

Many of us who wanted a more loosely-structured event, made NetrootsUK into exactly that, by filling the hallways, Tweeting, making connections with other interesting people, and subverting the top-down authority of the plenary environment, in which the vast majority of participants have no voice.

So rather than criticise the event, I feel it was a great success – I know that I had at least a few conversations which are already starting to grow into new ideas and actions, and for that I’m hugely grateful that NetrootsUK came together as it did! :)

I particularly agree (as you know!) on the points about re-electing a Labour party and frustration with formal party politics.

It seemed to me that some of the workshops sessions were really good – empowering people through training, so that they can take skills away for lower-level disparate community organisating.

But there’s always the question underlying it all about how inclusive and/or extensive an online presence is.

IMHO it should support, not dictate things that are already happening elsewhere. As someone said in the digital equality session, we shouldn’t expect them to come to us, we should but go to them.