Re: 1000 person virtual meeting (Was: Re: Concerns about Singapore)

Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> Tue, 12 April 2016 00:34 UTC

Return-Path: <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
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 767ED12D973 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 17:34:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 McA-aO6ls2L9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 17:34:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server1.neighborhoods.net (server1.neighborhoods.net [207.154.13.48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DC1712D926 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 17:34:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by server1.neighborhoods.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5C55CC065 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 20:34:33 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-2.6.2 (20081215) (Debian) at neighborhoods.net
Received: from server1.neighborhoods.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (server1.neighborhoods.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id FODAGgr7vp3o for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 20:34:31 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from Miless-MBP.fios-router.home (pool-108-26-191-201.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [108.26.191.201]) by server1.neighborhoods.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CF283CC04B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 20:34:31 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: 1000 person virtual meeting (Was: Re: Concerns about Singapore)
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <m260vp7eke.wl%randy@psg.com> <570A6458.3050206@comcast.net> <m21t6d7c9t.wl%randy@psg.com> <570A67B4.3010206@comcast.net> <570AB3AF.2050401@gmail.com> <87twj99c6w.fsf@tops.chopps.org> <CAKe6YvMyp-DyeDwpPY6KYmbDbnpgnvVk_cUStnA32wmgDWcz3w@mail.gmail.com> <BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD233A62AA18@XMB122CNC.rim.net> <20160411104519.GA19092@gsp.org> <3F48466D-390C-4C18-B958-732AE3E46FF1@gmail.com> <20160411223403.GA6743@gsp.org> <570C2985.9030701@cs.tcd.ie> <CAN-Dau0JzMNrUFU6baX1=M4FtfF85oEkyr7PmSbt5TBNPMHumQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAPt1N1kKMDvZt6K_QxRt4SVbzw6FOjkXH2fFbntxWn28i=NLfA@mail.gmail.com> <20160412003025.1739C461BB18@rock.dv.isc.org>
From: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net>
Message-ID: <570C4296.5010302@meetinghouse.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 20:34:30 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160412003025.1739C461BB18@rock.dv.isc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/B_dWcj0QTIWobSK8dsdTxnXQjv8>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 00:34:35 -0000

On 4/11/16 8:30 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> I also have no doubt one could do a 1000 person remote meeting.
>
> That being said, I've tried to do remote attendence at meetings
> both where there is a small timezone offset and a large timezone
> offset.  The small timezone offset "works" but in no way replaces
> face to face meetings.  The large timezone offset only works if you
> have 1 or 2 working groups to want to attend.
>
> Face to face forces attendees to be mostly in sync with respect to
> the timezone.  BA was a 10 hour shift for me but it was do able.
>

Well, keep in mind that a 1000-person in-person meeting is pretty hard 
as well.  Sure, it works as a plenary session, but in-person working 
meetings also break down at pretty low numbers.

Now, if one thinks about multiple, simultaneous, remote meetings - of 
10-50 people each - things start to sound a more feasible.

Just a thought,

Miles Fidelman



-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.  .... Yogi Berra