Summary: Lots of posters allow for great discussions but more talks (or thematic posters) allow for new investigators to highlight their work to a larger audience that would be unlikely to come by their poster. My vote is for more posters in general - but with the caveat of picking several great established investigators talks and reserving a few talks from new investigators that are up and coming in the field - and/or their work compliments the keynote talks in theme.

Discussion: SFN prides itself on the poster sessions and no one is disappointed to get a poster. The 4 hour sessions provide invaluable feedback from great face-to-face conversations which I prefer to the large audience podiums in terms of serious discussion. I always come back from SFN with new ideas about my research!

The major drawback of SFN (and lots of posters) is there is a loss of a platform for young/new investigators to present their research to a larger audience. Established investigators don't need this type of platform nearly as much but it is critical for new faculty trying to build a brand new research platform. Some of us (like me) are working into a brand new field and conference audiences. I learn a lot at SFN but I rarely meet new faces (aside from students). I go to smaller conferences like NCM or ISEK where a podium talk significantly increases my audience and brings my research to the attention of established investigators. NCM in particular has made a point of including new investigators in their podium talk line-up in recent years. They have also made a point of adding a new investigator to their board.

I think there is a place and a need for both styles of conferences (as well as a mix between the two). My vote is for more posters in general - but with the caveat of picking several great established investigators talks and reserving a few talks from new investigators that are up and coming in the field - and/or their work compliments the keynote talks in theme.

Thanks for putting such great energy into an interesting discussion!
~Claire Honeycutt, ASU



Quote Originally Posted by rmiller View Post
Hi Steve,

Among those options I like #1 the best (more posters). I've not been to SFN or ORS but I've heard the posters are a centerpiece at those meetings; maybe folks who attend those meetings often can comment on what (if anything) they do that's different from ASB.

I've always really enjoyed the thematic poster sessions at ASB and would be in favor of having more of those and reducing the podiums to only the keynotes, submitted sessions, and awards, but I guess that wouldn't necessarily help with the meeting size issue.

Ross