We are asked, often, to run bigger rooms. We do not.
Kept small, the room is a single conversation. Every participant is present to every other, every question is heard, and every contribution is observable. The host can read the room and adjust it in real time.
Scaled up, the room becomes an audience. Some voices recede; the dialogue becomes a sequence of presentations. The host reverts to lecturing rather than hosting. Calibre drops, and so does what participants are willing to say in front of each other.
The economic argument for a bigger room is that it covers its cost more easily. The argument for a small one is that the size is what makes the learning work. Platforms that scale can fill a hall. We would rather convene a group where every question gets answered.
