Re: [112attendees] WG followup discussions in gather.town (was: Re: HotRFC Gather followup)

[Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Toerless,

On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 10:34 AM Toerless Eckert <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Spencer:
>
> "Request For Collaborators" is very nice. Maybe rename from HotRFC to
> RFCollab or
> the like. [Insert standard rant how today, drafts are the real RFC]
>
> I think that the goal of "awareness" at early stages of the document is
> good. But i specifically liked the opportunity for actual discssion,
> which was new with the gather.town instance vs. prior HotRFC. This may
> not be the original intent, but it very worth keeping IMHO.
>

Full disclosure - I was asked to work with Aaron and Alexa on HotRFC for
this IETF, so all the good ideas are theirs and the other ideas are, of
course, mine ...

I didn't have a clear idea what would happen in the HotTFC spaces last
Wednesday - I was expecting a lot of drop-in traffic just to find out about
side meetings and ways to talk this week, but people came in, we started
talking, and THEY NEVER LEFT!!! We stayed in my space until about 15
minutes after the slot ended, which was fine, but I didn't expect that.

So, yeah, if we think discussion during the HotRFC slot is a good thing, we
might think about how to make that more likely to happen.


> My point was that the same type of discussions we did have in HotRFC this
> time where also core element of WGs on the hallways, and we should try to
> also enable them as well.
>

That seems very reasonable.


> But right now, i think the mayority of participants are too lazy to
> give gather.town enough playtime that they would start to see benefits
> *sigh*
>

Gather gets better at almost every IETF meeting (modulo Randy's observation
about spyware, etc.), so it's getting easier to find someone or something
that you need to run into, but definitely having things in Gather that give
people a reason to pop in would help with that.

Best,

Spencer


> Cheers
>     Toerless
>
> On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 09:21:04AM -0600, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:
> > I wanted to follow up on one point Toerless mentioned.
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 7, 2021 at 3:46 PM Toerless Eckert <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, HotRFC area is nice, but i think we should want to give good
> guidance
> > > also to any WG related discussions in gather.town. Mine is this:
> > >
> >
> > When we started HotRFC ("request for conversations"), the goal was to
> allow
> > literally anyone with an Internet-related idea to get in front of the
> IETF
> > community at the beginning of the IETF meeting week, so that people had
> the
> > full IETF meeting to chase the presenters down.
> >
> > We were thinking that many of these would be ideas that weren't baked
> > enough to request a BOF, or propose to a WG, so the reason to give a
> > 4-minute talk was to find other people who cated, and were willing to
> help
> > you develop your ideas further (the abbreviation could have just as well
> > been "Request for Collaborators"), and tell them how to find you (could
> be
> > email, could be a side meeting, could be something else).
> >
> > Aaron (and the IESG sponsors) haven't run a vetting function for HotRFC
> > slots, so people have also spoken, saying "I'm going to be presenting
> this
> > new thing in this working group/research group meeting, so if you care,
> you
> > probably want to come and participate there". At least that was the
> > expectation in 2018.
> >
> > *Now that we are heavily meeting remotely, and are likely to be in hybrid
> > meetings for the foreseeable future, *it's probably worth thinking about
> > how people find out about new topics that have moved beyond "half-baked
> > idea I wrote on a napkin and sent slides to Aaron". If you're already on
> > the right mailing lists, you'd probably know about many of these things,
> > but that doesn't get you the kind of early cross-area awareness that we
> > think makes the IETF different from other standards organizations.
> >
> > And I mean cross-area awareness, not cross-area review.
> >
> > Does that make sense?
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Spencer
> >
> >
> > > I would also recommend all WG/RG chairs to make themselves available
> after
> > > their
> > > sessions in gather.town (as their time permits). Even if they
> themselves
> > > may be busy in another session, a chairs (away) avatar is always a good
> > > place to seek
> > > out followup discussions in gather.town after a WG/RG meeting. Same as
> > > what happens
> > > in in-person IETFs after a WG meeting.
> > >
> > > It is extremely easy to locate a person in gather.town:
> > > - clock on participants
> > > - find your person (e.g.: wg chair).
> > > - click on that person, click on follow
> > > - now your avatar will by itself walk to that persons avatar
> > > - click again on the person and click on "Stop following"
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >     Toerless
> > >
> > > On Sat, Nov 06, 2021 at 05:48:20AM -0700, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
> > > > I liked be able to talk to the author without the stress of having to
> > > formulate my questions right after the presentation, so Gather was
> nice for
> > > that, and I would suggest to continue using the same format after
> fixing
> > > the slowdown when a lot of people were on the floor.  I would also
> prefer
> > > to watch the presentations directly on Gather rather than on YouTube,
> after
> > > the problem of hearing other conversations is fixed.  A way to show
> that
> > > someone is interacting with video and other Gather objects would be
> nice
> > > too.
> > > >
> > > > On 11/6/21 05:38, Deb Cooley wrote:
> > > > > I liked the YouTube idea for the actual presentation.  I could
> watch it
> > > > > more than once to understand the ideas better.
> > > > >
> > > > > The Gather room part for discussion didn't work for me.  I'd
> suggest
> > > going
> > > > > back to Meetecho for the discussion part.  It could be a two step
> > > process -
> > > > > watch the YouTube videos 'session', then a Meetecho session to
> discuss.
> > > > >
> > > > > Deb Cooley
> > > > > [e-mail]
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 8:37 AM Alexandre PETRESCU <
> > > [e-mail]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > For the 'what should change' part - I suggest to make it work ok
> > > fully on
> > > > > > IPv6.  Last time I checked it worked only partially on IPv6: the
> > > sound
> > > > > > quality was worse on IPv6, some buttons on left could not be
> clicked
> > > on
> > > > > > IPv6, etc.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yours,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Alexandre [e-mail], tél [phone]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Le 03/11/2021 à 17:33, Aaron Falk a écrit :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > An update & 2 questions:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *Update:* The secretariat confirms that the HotRFC “rooms” will
> > > remain up
> > > > > > and available for your use through the end of the IETF next week.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *Questions:*
> > > > > >
> > > > > >     1. Should we use Gather to do this again?
> > > > > >     2. If so, what should we change?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --aaron
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Marc Petit-Huguenin
> > > > Email: [e-mail]
> > > > Blog: https://marc.petit-huguenin.org
> > > > Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > --
> > > > 112attendees mailing list
> > > > [e-mail]
> > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/112attendees
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > ---
> > > [e-mail]
> > >
> > > --
> > > 112attendees mailing list
> > > [e-mail]
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/112attendees
> > >
>
> --
> ---
> [e-mail]
>