Re: [113attendees] hybrid meetings: the worst of both worlds

Fascinating thread and diverse viewpoints - thanks - I love the global
airship...

My two cents - for those of us who are independents without any hope of
travel
budget from clients, international travel for ten days to a pricey hotel is
*way* out
of the question.  I've been joining IETF conferences remotely for more than
20
years and will continue to do so.

Cheers,
- Ira

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 4:30 PM Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
wrote:

>
> Robert Moskowitz <rgm@labs.htt-consult.com> wrote:
>     >> - remote-participation is arguably better for the technical WG
> process
>     >> than onsite at this point
>
>     > NO argument there.  Perhaps better use of jabber by physical
> attendees?
>
> I think that the same number of people were directly in jabber as usual.
> Yes, the huge influx of meetecho mediated people were not there because the
> on-site meetecho did not do chat.  Some people did use the full interface
> on-site, but for me, the "killer" reason to use the on-site version from
> the
> mobile phone is that it gave me the slide clicker.
>
>     >> - remote is really bad for the informal discussions (gather is very
>     >> disappointing imo)
>
>     > No debate.  And really gather was empty, given all who were
>     > remote. Granted I was only on during 'lunch' which was my breakfast.
>
> On a laptop screen there just isn't space to do gather.
> On a dual screen desktop, it works.  But more importantly, during the
> breaks,
> which is when people might to do gather, we, on-site, were collecting
> cookies
> and chatting.
>
> If gather had a place where I could walk up to a big screen (with my kaffe
> und kekse) and chat with remote people, I would have done that.
>
>     >> The most efficient WG were where most of the contributurs had
> decided
>     >> to show up onsite.
>
>     > All that I attended (other than plenary) had very empty rooms.  Good
>     > progress was still made.
>
> The rooms were in general very empty.
> I took pictures, partly to reduce anxiety of my family.
>
>     >> The most important discussions I had were (as usual) not in a WG
>     >> meeting.
>     >>
>     >> Maybe the IETF needs to rehink the purpouse of onsite meetings.
>
>     > I am worried about shmoo pushing 1 F2F per year.
>
> There are pluses and minues about such a process, and I think that we might
> get to such a thing in ten years.   I think that probably we should.
> But, I don't know how to get there, and I don't think we should force.
> (I also don't think that shmoo is pushing towards that *AT ALL*)
>
> --
> ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh
> networks [
> ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network
> architect  [
> ]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on
> rails    [
>
> --
> 113attendees mailing list
> 113attendees@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/113attendees
>