Re: [93attendees] Meeting schedule

[Jared Mauch <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 02:34:53AM -0700, Randall Gellens wrote:
> At 11:48 PM +0000 7/20/15, Kireeti Kompella wrote:
> 
> > Speaking for myself, I far prefer this schedule to one that constrains
> >you to an hour and a half of dinner, and wants you to then come back and
> >meet some more.
> 
> It's a question of what to optimize for:
> 	- Sheer quantity of meeting time
> 	- Opportunity for attendees to have adequate sleep
> 	- Opportunities for attendees to eat
> 	- Opportunities for ad-hoc meetings and socializing
> 
> Personally, I value my health and strongly believe that my ability to get
> adequate sleep has a direct and immediate impact on my ability to contribute
> meaningfully and do high-quality work, and suggest that this holds true for
> others.  I know many others feel they are able to function on little sleep
> and lots of caffeine and adrenaline, and would disregard any studies
> suggesting they are deluding oneself.

        I have certainly seen an increase in interim meetings occuring
for various WGs that I track. I think this is a good thing trying to
get the work moved along.  Two WGs I plan to attend ended up
on Mon + Fri.  With the location and family obligations
at home, Friday ended up being my trek-home day meaning I will
miss these WGs.  I know scheduling is hard and I talked to the WG
chairs to ask for them to provide some input on the scheduling this
time.  I've already heard feedback that it should be better next time,
and for that I think those who offer up their time to help make the IETF
what it is, despite all the on-list and off-list gripes that occur.

        - Jared


-- 
Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from [e-mail]
clue++;      | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/  My statements are only mine.