Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 27/04/2017 02:17, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> Whether in the IETF or elsewhere, there is one aspect you do not mention 
> that I find useful asa presenter, and one aspect that I find useful in 
> well-done presentations as a participant.
> 
> 1) As a Presenter, if I have managed to do my presentation right, it 
> helps me get the important points covered in the right order.  yes, I 
> usually remember them.  But not always.  And it helps in getting back on 
> track after useful discussions of particular points.
> 
> 2) As a participant, I find it very helpful if the slide tells me what 
> the presenter considers the critical points for me to think about. 
> (There are also the not uncommon cases where a diagram helps me 
> understand the point the speaker is trying to make.)

Both points are true, and neither requires the slides to be read out loud.
Perhaps we could add to the standard question "Has everybody read the
draft?" a new question "Has everybody read the slides? Good, so we'll go
straight to the open issues."

Ideally, meetings should discuss either new work items or open issues on
unfinished work items.

   Brian

> 
> Yours,
> Joel
> 
> On 4/26/17 10:04 AM, Michael Richardson wrote:
>>
>> Toerless Eckert <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>     > For example, there is a lot of death by powerpoint in meetings that
>>     > pushes off high bandwidth discussions ("oh, we're out of time"). AFAIK,
>>     > most active work on drafts during IETF meeting week happens outside of
>>
>> I am among those who pushes back on death by powerpoint, so I agree with you
>> strongly.  Presentations are very easily supported through completely remote
>> attendance.  Concurrent jabber back-channel discussion among the participants
>> can often bring out points that are sometimes lost in the foreground presentation.
>>
>> {Maybe we should dispense with the meeting rooms, just wire the hotel rooms
>> for GbE, and all be on-site, but "remote".  Then the critical criteria for
>> which city to meet in is reduced to where the best beer can be had.  (And so
>> Prague wins?)}
>>
>> But, on somewhat more serious note [note lack of :-) above], I have been told
>> the following features about the deathly powerpoints:
>>   1) provides a record of thoughts for later on.
>>   2) permits non-english speakers to understand what is being said by
>>      other non-english speakers!!!
>>   3) can be pushed through google-translate.
>>   4) can be read ahead of time by chairs and participants so that they
>>      can ask intelligent questions, and/or can allocate appropriate amounts
>>      of time.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
>>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
>>
>>
>>
> 
>