I pretty much gave up on the opening session a few years back, and in fact did not go in 2002. (It was the only convenient time I could get a speaker rehearsal room.) I heard from a couple people that 2002 was a little better than some of the immediately preceding ones, so I decided to try it again in Seattle, to my regret.

Like Jack, I don't begrudge SAS the chance to "own" this part of the conference, but wish they would take better advantage of it in terms of the interests and orientation of the audience. I had a much better understanding of the much-vaunted "Intelligence Value Chain" after a couple of quick 5-minute conversations with developers in the demo area on Monday that I got out of the opening session.

The one thing I specifically missed this year, and mentioned on my response to the post-SUGI survey, was having a few highlights from the SASWare Ballot (i.e. mentioning a couple of key items that were going to get implemented).

But it seems like we have had this discussion over and over, and "they" still don't get it. So I am not at all optimistic that things will change much for Montreal. I suspect it will be shorter, but not otherwise better.

Mike Rhoads Westat RhoadsM1@Westat.com

-----Original Message----- From: Jack Hamilton [mailto:JackHamilton@FIRSTHEALTH.COM] Sent: Monday, April 28, 2003 1:12 PM To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: The SUGI Opening Session

There hasn't been much discussion on the list this year of the SUGI opening session. Was it non-controversial, or has everyone given up on it, or what?

...

-- JackHamilton@FirstHealth.com Manager, Technical Development Metrics Department, First Health West Sacramento, California USA