Re:Booth Babes, Street Clothes, and GDC: Thanks But You sort...
by cdtwigg on Thursday March 28, 2013 @09:18PM
(#5458727)
Why assume that anyone who isn't deeply expert in the technical details of a product isn't a full-time employee of the company? Many companies hire sales/marketing people of both genders that may have a relatively superficial understanding of the inner details but are more enthusiastic and outgoing than the engineering staff.
Re:Booth Babes, Street Clothes, and GDC: Thanks But You sort...
by rurounijones on Thursday March 28, 2013 @11:26PM
(#5459091)
With the idea I stated above there is nothing stopping sales / marketing people from going. While they may not be techies per se I expect them to be knowledgeable out their products.
My proposal is purely to get rid of the "Pretty face, no knowledge, hired solely for the event" style of "booth-babe".
Of course companies could hire people for the require X months but I am hoping the monetary aspects of that would discourage them.
Also, enforcing the proposal would be tricky I think.
Re:Booth Babes, Street Clothes, and GDC: Thanks But You sort...
by pekk on Thursday March 28, 2013 @10:20PM
(#5458908)
If I go to a technical conference, I am not interested in talking to sales and marketing people of any gender or dimensions. That is something which the sales and marketing people want, not something I want.
I cannot actually see a problem with #2, it would be my preferred solution. When I go to trade shows / conferences it is to talk to brains, not bodies, the sex of the brain is immaterial to me.
To me, making sure the bodies are 50% equal in gender means nothing if 80% of the female bodies are only there to make up a body quota but have no interest / knowledge of what is going on.
Maybe change it slightly so that the rules state anyone at the booth must be a full-time employee or a contract employee with X months at the company.
Could you go into a bit more detail about your reasoning for #2 not being suitable?
[EDIT] Messed up my percentages