The original idea for the event was driven by two primary factors. The first of which was the most important - the rise of what I call "knowledge networking". The second was the seemingly ever increasing buzz around Web 2.0 and the fact that many people I know could not afford to go to the Web 2.0 conference because of the expense. Using the name Web 2.1 for the event was more of a marketing strategy, just like BarCamp was as an alternative to Foo Camp. It was not meant to really be its own thing, though it did become that as evidenced by the rise of the number of hits on Google when searching for Web 2.1 from a few thousand to more than 76,000 as of 10/21/2005.

Secondly, Web 2.0 is merely an easy to use identifier for the meme - to distinguish itself as different from what happened during the first boom. In a sense, it is an effort to "rebrand" the emergence of these new Internet technologies so the new stuff does not suffer from brand drag caused by the dotcom bust. As we discovered with Web 2.1, the real key to this movement is to focus on real people rather than just the technology. The good news is that I continue to meet more and more developers, tinkerers and entrepreneurs who feel the same way, who want what they create to be invaluable to real people and genuinely put them at the center of their thinking.

So rather than get into a war of versioning with other people's perspectives (Web 3.4 anyone?) or competing with all the good people working around Web 2.0, I prefer to call it "The Open Web". While I detest the name Web 2.0, for all practical purposes, the wisdom of crowds has spoken and annointed this era that of Web 2.0, so I will just live with it as we all need to do - as unfotunate as that may be.

Which brings us to our point about why I want to call what we do BrainJams. It is something different. It is something that is beyond the restrictions of the Web 2.0 meme. It is the beginning of a new wave of thinking, of knowledge networking if you will - the kind of thiinking we once had with the Company of Friends when Heath Row was cultivating that vibrant community. It needs to move beyond the realm of anyone person's or organization's ability to deinfe its scope. Some people have pointed me back to the idea of the Chautauqua from the beginning of the 20th century. I like that approach and hope to learn a lot from what they did back then, but if BrainJams are somewhat similar in any regards, it is also quite different as a result of the application of Open Web technologies.

Besides, BrainJams just sounds cool and fun and important - at least I aspire to make it so. I hope you will find a way to join us and help in whatever way makes sense to you.