Have you ever had one of those times where you say, “Wow, I actually feel like part of the gang?” Ya, I had mine a few days ago at WHET.

WHET stands for the Workshop on Heuristic and Exploratory Techniques, and was recently held at Quardev Laboratories in Seattle, Washington. The topic was Boundary Testing, a look at how exploring boundaries could lead to rich, interesting bugs.

WHET is a peer conference modeled in the popular LAWST style that seems to be overtaking the industry. The conference is made up of a selected group of 15 to 20 people, each tasked with sharing their experiences with the rest of the group. Although this was the sixth peer conference I’ve been to — which, in my opinion, is a good record for my ripe old age of 22 — I didn’t feel like I totally belonged.

My role, in all it’s glory, felt like a student’s role. I just graduated (so I wasn’t actually a student), but I didn’t have the rich cache of experience the others did. Because of this, I couldn’t confidently sit with the group of attendees and say “Ya, I’ve had those experiences too.”

Throughout the workshop, we talked extensively about boundaries, and argued all the different ways you can think of them, express them, find them, and value them. I was overwhelmed with the mass of information presented to me, and I didn’t know how to take it all in. Because I had little experience, I opted toward staying quiet.

Boy, was this the wrong idea.

While listening to every bit of discussion that I could wrap my mind around, I silently came up with these insights. Some of these are abstractions from the material presented, others are my own. All are up for debate.

1. Boundaries are subjective. That’s right. What’s a boundary for you may not be a boundary to me. For example, look at a curb. We already know that curbs represent boundaries for some actions, and therefore, for some people. A boundary is not a boundary unless it’s a boundary for some action, event or state.
2. Some boundaries are imaginary. For example, think asymptotes. There is no point on the graph that physically represents the asymptote, yet it’s still a very distinct boundary within the function. (As a rhetorical, what’s the best representative on each side???).
3. The Object Heuristic. If there is ever a time when you can say something is (such as, this page is a blog post), then you are implicitly expressing the physical boundaries of that object. If there were no boundaries for that object, than it could not be represented as different from any other.
4. The Negative Attribute Heuristic. After objectifying, go meta. What are the attributes of the object? Its use. Its size. Its proposed function. It’s allowed input. Now ask for its negative. What’s not its use? What’s not its size? What’s not it’s proposed function? What’s not allowed? Now explore the relationship between two. If you can find a meaningful and testable relationship, there’s probably a boundary there.
5. The Zoom Heuristic. Start objectifying at the farthest zoom level. After objectifying, explore the negative attributes and their relationships. Identify your boundaries. Now zoom in. Find a piece of the whole that you’re interested in. Objectify it, and explore its negative attributes. Wash, rinse, repeat. Zoom in until zooming isn’t useful, and zoom out to objectify a different object. (Note: This is a cognitive depth first search.)

I was planning on staying quiet until end of the workshop, but I was forced to talk on the very last day. Rob Sabourin, the co-content owner of the workshop, asked me to give the group my perspective in the very last lightning talk. He wanted to “end it with something cool.”

I wanted to tell Rob that my perspective wasn’t going to be great. I wasn’t nervous, but I didn’t think my experience would be that useful. Heck, I barely understood half of what was said throughout the workshop. What use could it be?

To my own surprise, I was given the “ooh” and “ah” version of a standing ovation. They loved it. This group of experienced people actually had use for what I had to say, and then thanked me for contributing my perspective!

This felt like a huge coming of age. I was a student when I came into the workshop, and was a useful contributor when I came out. A huge hurdle had been jumped over. I overcame a boundary.

This boundary was unknown to me. It was imaginary, and was hindering my ability to contribute to the group. The problem was, I decided not to test it — I decided to stay quiet, and simply fit into the role I thought I was bound by. My own self confidence stopped me from being what I wanted to be.

Thank you Rob, for helping me overcome that.

Update, 7/11/07: There’s someone else who’s actively trying to break the student barrier for me, and I believe he deserves credit here as well. Jon Bach, the other co-content owner of WHET, has intentionally tried to treat me as a member of the group (instead of a student) and has actively encouraged others to do so as well. If there’s any indication of what it’s like to attend a peer workshop, this would be it. Thank you Jon.