Re: Disappointing take-up of Gather.Town

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Thu, 30 July 2020 18:57 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 173B53A09BA for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 11:57:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.753
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.753 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.347, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cryptonector.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ut0410b_xiGD for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 11:57:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bonobo.elm.relay.mailchannels.net (bonobo.elm.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.212.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BDCA3A09AD for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 11:57:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6248B6419C2; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 18:57:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a100.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-23-22.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.23.22]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A9B64641A41; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 18:57:18 +0000 (UTC)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a100.g.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.18.8); Thu, 30 Jul 2020 18:57:19 +0000
X-MC-Relay: Neutral
X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost
X-Daffy-Bottle: 086d33647e4937c4_1596135439001_1714784076
X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1596135439001:114064689
X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1596135439001
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a100.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a100.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61FA2B390F; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 11:57:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=cryptonector.com; bh=ofw088I3en9kNR hdU8oNxjBOcCI=; b=EuC24MDlGtsJuz+4EhOwrBVtqKlQC2gBxqsKaHdz4IRWP2 e/GItNcWhleG3CnOJIWxaWA0q5ePw+IVgTKcHlVEbunyU+Y1vPl1WO38nJXbcv/W 8ZOknTAxwxpQLdkheRolOuXShNc7kmWeASQhMdc1ufezZM0NHjGlSA+MwlP2A=
Received: from localhost (unknown [24.28.108.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a100.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 51F2EB3912; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 11:57:16 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 13:57:14 -0500
X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a100
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
Cc: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Disappointing take-up of Gather.Town
Message-ID: <20200730185713.GN3100@localhost>
References: <024001d66664$ebdc3b90$c394b2b0$@olddog.co.uk> <a9267787-d24a-25af-2e99-fe87b74a2640@bogus.com> <78F02C48B3ACFADD958D87D6@PSB> <CAHbuEH6xAuuXvLW=L8Q8B+qdBb=nds83sP+fOeA_M2kW9UtDPA@mail.gmail.com> <20200730172714.GM3100@localhost> <alpine.LRH.2.23.451.2007301342150.417154@bofh.nohats.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.23.451.2007301342150.417154@bofh.nohats.ca>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
X-VR-OUT-STATUS: OK
X-VR-OUT-SCORE: -100
X-VR-OUT-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedrieeigddufedvucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuggftfghnshhusghstghrihgsvgdpffftgfetoffjqffuvfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhepfffhvffukfhfgggtuggjfgesthdtredttdervdenucfhrhhomheppfhitghoucghihhllhhirghmshcuoehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpefftdektefhueetveeigfefgeejteejvdfhhefgvddtfeeujeehleeguefhgffhgfenucfkphepvdegrddvkedruddtkedrudekfeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhhouggvpehsmhhtphdphhgvlhhopehlohgtrghlhhhoshhtpdhinhgvthepvdegrddvkedruddtkedrudekfedprhgvthhurhhnqdhprghthheppfhitghoucghihhllhhirghmshcuoehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhmqedpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhmpdhnrhgtphhtthhopehnihgtohestghrhihpthhonhgvtghtohhrrdgtohhm
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/0QiIdyodGQmgoxG_zquCdQ9P2Uw>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 18:57:26 -0000

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 01:46:48PM -0400, Paul Wouters wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Jul 2020, Nico Williams wrote:
> > Also, maybe we need scheduled hallway meetups during other weeks as
> > well, because if one's TZ offset to the meeting's is large enough, it's
> > just too difficult to spare 10 hours a day to the meeting and hallway
> > meetings.
> 
> For me, I noticed that after my early morning start and having a few
> meetings behind my laptop, I just need to have a break and leave my
> house, catch some sun and a coffee. So that means I'm not available in
> the "coffee time slots". I can't see myself doing 3h of meetings, 30
> minutes of "still behind my laptop chatting with people", followed by
> 3h of meetings.

Right, so, 16 hour meeting days for remote-only meetings won't happen.

> > We might want to consider spreadign remote-only meetings over two weeks
> > instead of one.
> 
> Please don't :)
> I can mark a week as "IETF week" and my collegues know I'm mostly
> gone/busy, but extending that to two weeks would not work. It would
> result in me not being able to drop most non-IETF work, and it would
> be harder for me to be seen as "busy at IETF". So regular work would
> interfere and expect precedence over my IETF meetings.

If it's two-hours a day for hallway meetings it'd be workable.

Anyways, feel free to propose alternatives.