This is an incredibly non-optimal way to organize such an event. It’s not even particularly rational. How can you decide which event goes in which room? (We had half a dozen rooms ranging from 10 chairs to 100.) How can you avoid scheduling sessions that would attract the same audience against each other in the same time slot? How can you make sure introductory sessions come before advanced sessions?
As a poster child for the left brain, I can visualize all sorts of mechanisms… each attendee gets one vote per time slot, and you circulate a list of all potential sessions, and each attendees prioritizes his or her votes, and you work out a weighting function, and count noses to fit each room….
Or you go with the flipchart paper and the fistful of magic markers, and It Just Works.
There’s probably some deep lesson in all this about the nature of self-organizing systems. Or maybe it’s just a trivial observation: collect intelligent people, trust them to act intelligently, and the results will probably be pretty good. Not optimal. Not as good as my (unimplemented!) multiply-weighted-and-prioritized voting scheme. But good enough to work.
If you haven’t attended a BarCamp (or any of the other breeds of “unconferences”), you should.