Re: [93attendees] [IAOC] Meeting schedule

[Henning Schulzrinne <[e-mail]>]

My experience differs - the working groups I have attended so far this week all made good use of their allocated time (and, in some cases, could have used a bit more).


We have been talking about "more efficient use of time" as long as I've been attending IETF meetings, and the basics haven't changed much. Thus, in the sense of engineering practicality, there is a food trade-off: imposition of sub-optimal lunch for an activity that can consumed asynchronously (for many) or very long meeting days.

________________________________
From: Ted Lemon <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 9:36 AM
To: Henning Schulzrinne
Cc: Ole Jacobsen; [e-mail]; The IESG; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [93attendees] [IAOC] Meeting schedule

On Jul 21, 2015, at 9:29 AM, Henning Schulzrinne <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
As long as the number of people with special food needs is smallish, this should be manageable, possibly at the cost of missing the first 15 minutes. This obviously works better in places like Prague, with plenty of take-out and grocery store options.

Impositions always seem small if you are not the one bearing them.   I would appreciate it if you could stop denying that the problem with your proposal that I have raised is a problem.   It may be that what I want is actually not important, but it's a real problem for me, even if it's not a problem for you.   Furthermore, solving the problem that we are making poor use of time during IETF f2f meetings by cramming the agenda with yet another interval when we don't have a break is not going to solve the problem.   Instead, it's going to result in more people skipping the plenary.

Why not instead solve the problem that we don't make good use of IETF meeting time?