Read more about this event.

See also the 2025 summary.

Attendees

• Total: 16 people
• Recurring: 13 people
• New: 3 people

1. Practical use: For my life, what we did today will have …

• Responses: 14 people (87.50% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • a lot of practical use (1): 1 person
  • quite a bit of practical use (2): 3 people
  • some practical use (3): 6 people
  • little practical use (4): 4 people
  • very little practical use (5): 0 people
• Average answer: 2.93 (σ=0.92)

2. The atmosphere / vibe was …

• Responses: 14 people (87.50% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • fantastic (1): 5 people
  • good (2): 6 people
  • okay (3): 3 people
  • bad (4): 0 people
  • horrible (5): 0 people
• Average answer: 1.86 (σ=0.77)

3. The amount of content / exercises covered was …

• Responses: 13 people (81.25% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • way too much (1): 0 people
  • too much (2): 1 person
  • just right (3): 11 people
  • too little (4): 1 person
  • way too little (5): 0 people
• Average answer: 3.00 (σ=0.41)

4. The difficulty level of the content / discussion was …

• Responses: 14 people (87.50% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • much too easy (1): 1 person
  • too easy (2): 2 people
  • just right (3): 10 people
  • too difficult (4): 1 person
  • much too difficult (5): 0 people
• Average answer: 2.79 (σ=0.70)

5. Structure: On the whole the event needed …

• Responses: 14 people (87.50% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • much more structure (1): 0 people
  • more structure (2): 5 people
  • (was just right) (3): 9 people
  • less structure (4): 0 people
  • much less structure (5): 0 people
• Average answer: 2.64 (σ=0.50)

6. The moderation should have been …

• Responses: 14 people (87.50% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • much more relaxed (1): 0 people
  • more relaxed (2): 1 person
  • (was just right) (3): 9 people
  • more assertive (4): 4 people
  • much more assertive (5): 0 people
• Average answer: 3.21 (σ=0.58)

7. Host preparation: The content / exercises were …

• Responses: 14 people (87.50% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • very well prepared (1): 5 people
  • well prepared (2): 5 people
  • okay prepared (3): 4 people
  • not well prepared (4): 0 people
  • not well prepared at all (5): 0 people
• Average answer: 1.93 (σ=0.83)

8. Changing your mind: The event made me …

• Responses: 14 people (87.50% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • question many things (1): 0 people
  • question some things (2): 6 people
  • question few things (3): 4 people
  • question very few things (4): 4 people
  • not question anything (5): 0 people
• Average answer: 2.86 (σ=0.86)

9. Do you think you will come to one (or more) of the next three events?

• Responses: 13 people (81.25% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • probably no: 1 person
  • probably yes: 12 people

10. If you answered “probably no” in the previous question or are very uncertain, why is that?

• Responses: 1 person (6.25% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • Friday evening is a bad timeslot for me.: 0 people
  • I can’t fit another activity into my life.: 0 people
  • I did not like (some of) the people here.: 0 people
  • I did not like today’s venue.: 0 people
  • I live too far away.: 1 person
  • I’m not very interested in your usual topics.: 0 people
  • The level of English is too advanced for me.: 0 people

11. What did you like the most today?

• Responses: 9 people (56.25% of attendees)

Note: Anything contained in square brackets [] is an edit by the organizers.

Discussing various topics with people

Well chosen articles, overall structure of the event

Die Diskussion in der kleinen Gruppe

The topics were interesting and had good variety

Opposing ideas and animated debating

Various topics

Open discussion, respectful interactions

Conflict theory

The discussion in groups

12. What did you like the least?

• Responses: 7 people (43.75% of attendees)

Note: Anything contained in square brackets [] is an edit by the organizers.

Taste of Water

Our discussion group was too big, I did not feel able to split it then

Die Diskussion am Ende über AI war etwas off-topic und unstrukturiert

Sometimes the discussion became unstructured but maybe that’s a feature

More focus on AI

non-inclusive discussion

The article about IQ - I thought it was too superficial