Re: Interim step on meetings site feedback for sites currently under active consideration

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Wed, 20 April 2016 10:48 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
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 A312812DF49 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 03:48:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.196
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.196 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996] 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 42lk36axSuqd for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 03:48:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C45412DDA2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 03:48:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 870177C7DD2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 12:48:39 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at alvestrand.no
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mork.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ompjcMFkbBT7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 12:48:38 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from hta-hippo.lul.corp.google.com (unknown [IPv6:2620:0:1043:12:a180:7eff:b055:c675]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1AC457C7DCF for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 12:48:38 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Re: Interim step on meetings site feedback for sites currently under active consideration
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <20160418161552.9368.65562.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <8fb376e11631f9ddf73f9385ec5472c3.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <57151C55.30206@gmail.com> <54D9A539-6409-4692-85F6-E4837E823AAE@gmail.com> <CAPt1N1n+676sAWFLee3oUGUgnTNHh95yFgrsmyjB5VbSmF-=XQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKe6YvPGufULDN=SLbR8YZ-7-tUj-H18U4h4JTH7_S3UJKvRbw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Message-ID: <57175E85.2030804@alvestrand.no>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 12:48:37 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKe6YvPGufULDN=SLbR8YZ-7-tUj-H18U4h4JTH7_S3UJKvRbw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/I_lHiDvKlsWtMPV7KNPEZPD4Hmo>
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: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 10:48:43 -0000

I think we should not let the perfect become the enemy of the good with
regard to measuring impact.

If we see a large cohort of first-time Buenos Aires attendees show up at
later meetings (Berlin being the first chance for them to show), we have
a strong signal that they thought it was worth it, and likely that
having the meeting in BA helped the community by helping recruit them.
Case closed (apart from some corner case possibilities I'm sure we,
being engineers, can all imagine).

If we don't see such a cohort, we need to dig deeper.

Let's do the obvious measurements. They're not useless just because they
don't show everything.

On 04/19/2016 08:56 PM, Vinayak Hegde wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 11:25 PM, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> wrote:
>> It should be pretty easy for the IAD to measure this by comparing the list
>> of newcomers in Argentina to the list of participants in Berlin, for
>> example.   I am fairly sure that they already do this, and possibly may even
>> have made presentations about it from time to time at the plenary... :)
> Hi Ted,
>
> I am not picking on you but this idea is flawed at many levels.
> Fundamentally we need to answer
> 1. What does a (meaningful ?) contribution mean ?
> 2. How does that relate to active participation ? Are there thresholds
> or is it a continuum ? Does I mean writing a draft or is reviewing
> drafts, taking minutes and hacking on code to check real world
> implementation good enough.
>
> The answers are more nuanced and varied than one might guess at first
> glance. At IETF 95 in BA several long-time contributors participated
> remotely. I am sure that they would take offense to this idea if they
> have contributed remotely and on the mailing lists.
>
> Just to emphasize, several WG chairs also do not attend every meeting.
> Are they active ? I think there needs to be less emphasis on physical
> meetings overall (FWIW I think we are already moving in that direction
> quite rapidly. But at the same time F2F interaction cannot be done
> away with completely IMHO and is also not going away.)
>
> -- Vinayak
>