Date:         Mon, 28 Apr 2003 17:09:43 -0400
Reply-To:     Mike Rhoads <RHOADSM1@WESTAT.COM>
Sender:       "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         Mike Rhoads <RHOADSM1@WESTAT.COM>
Subject:      Re: The SUGI Opening Session
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

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