IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [vmeet] IETF95 remote attendance

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Fri, 15 April 2016 15:48 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 8606D12DF42; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 08:48:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, 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 9FWMn2ZxJ2o5; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 08:48:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B5C7D12DF0A; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 08:48:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EB6A203B7; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 11:52:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4BCB6375A; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 11:48:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Meetecho IETF support <ietf@meetecho.com>
Subject: Re: [vmeet] IETF95 remote attendance
In-Reply-To: <5710CA7F.3050207@meetecho.com>
References: <5710CA7F.3050207@meetecho.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.4.2
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 11:48:00 -0400
Message-ID: <1204.1460735280@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/EYR2rz5QfY4hk5xTf61NWb5ALNw>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, vmeet@ietf.org
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: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 15:48:02 -0000

Meetecho IETF support <ietf@meetecho.com> wrote:
    > - 621 registered remote participants.

    > - 712 unique remote participants joined Meetecho through the week;
    > among these, 282 opted to also put their Registration ID.

These numbers seem weird.
621 people registered, but then somewhere between 339 and 430 of them decided
not to put in their ID.
Clearly 91 people attended without having registered.

Some people might have put their registration in sometimes, and not other
times?    Would that couild as two?

If someone didn't put their number in for multiple sessions, would that count
as multiple?

Well, it says "712 unique".. how was that uniqueness determined, if not through IDs? 
If I used different devices (work/home/tablet/laptop) would that cound as
multiple?

I'm very impressed with the numbers: something like 50% of participants were remote.

-- 
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email