One of the most interesting conversations for me was the 'speed vs. content' debate, and I actually saw this playing out as the afternoon went on.

At G20, I had arrived at the event and - somewhat naively - expected to produce an 'am' and a 'pm' blog post for each of the three days that the G20Voice project ran for. The focus would therefore have been on 'content'.

However, in reality, the weight of information I was exposed to was so great that Twittering turned out to be the most effective way to report back and get the news out there. I arrived at Media 140 expecting to do the opposite, with a focus on immediacy instead.

Of course, G20 was an event where the number of people using to Twitter to communicate was low, especially in comparison to a roomful of 200 people that attended Media 140 to talk specifically about that medium. There was bound to be a difference, but once again, it wasn't the one I had expected.

I watched many people around me at Media 140 live-tweet and blog the afternoon, which was a fantastic way to get the online community more involved. But as I sat and booted up Tweetdeck, ready to start settle in to a well-tested routine for reporting from events; a combination of listening to the people in the same room and watching people chatting about their reaction to the event on Twitter, something broke.

To be precise, Twitter's API wouldn't allow me to keep on top of the sheer weight of conversation. So, I couldn't really 'read' Twitter, and turned my attention solely to what was going on in front of me.

Though this possibly went against the purpose of me being there, I actually found it to be particularly refreshing. Like the conversation I mentioned heard earlier and agreed with (not everything is about speed), I was able to make the odd comment about how I felt about what was being discussed, instead of regurgitating what was already being said. This was almost solely because there were so many people doing a good job of reporting live already, that I had the freedom to sit back and actually think about what was being said.

Taking a look around the room during the break, I clocked the amount of people taking notes via pen and paper, and realised that because I was tweeting my own observations, I was actually using Twitter as my notepad.

Actually, I've been doing this for some time, looking back at what I was feeling at one point or another to trigger retrospective thoughts makes for an interesting way to blog an event. Some people use the 'favourites' feature to do the same but will greater accuracy.

I really enjoyed the panel sessions, especially the debate including Bill Thompson, who stated that (shock horror) not everything ends at Twitter. It is after all just one source of information, and like Wikipedia, research begins there, but doesn't finish. I also liked the advice that 'on the job' journalism experience once only achievable by working for local newspapers, is now made possible by blogging. Though many of my friends and colleagues working in local newspapers are unfortunately loosing their jobs because of online content, it was good to hear someone reiterate the positive outcomes.

However, the biggest conclusion for me was that I went expecting to learn more about how others use Twitter within their work, and as well as seeing some great case studies, ended up learning a whole lot more about myself.

It's not often that I go somewhere with one thing in mind and find something completely different . That's what made the day a really successful event from my perspective and I think others found the same. Perhaps not in a traditional sense, or what the organisers were expecting, but a success all the same.