Re: Agenda experiment for IETF 103 in November in Bangkok

["Andrew G. Malis" <[e-mail]>]

I could not agree more with Ted. I much prefer that either Friday be a
normal working day with sessions so we all plan on traveling home on Friday
night or Saturday, or we just end on Thursday. No in-between, because then
people will blow off Friday and leave anyway.

Cheers,
Andy


On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 12:24 PM, Ted Lemon <[e-mail]> wrote:

> The issue I see with this experiment is that I think that the predictions
> that nobody will stay for Friday is accurate—this belief produces a
> negative network effect that will mean that even people who would want to
> show up because the proposed schedule for Friday would in theory be useful
> won't show up, because they know that in practice there won't be a quorum
> of people who stay through Friday.   And this means that a lot of
> facilities will be paid for and not used.   So in that sense I think this
> is a bad idea.   If we aren't going to have meetings on Friday, Friday
> should just be a teardown day, and not a day when we hold meeting rooms
> available.
>
> If we want to have informal meetings as described in the proposal, the way
> to do this is to announce that Friday will be a full day of meetings, just
> like any other day, announce that we will schedule popular meetings on
> Friday so that if you decide to leave Friday, you will miss those meetings,
> and then schedule the informal time in the middle somewhere as others have
> suggested.   It's always frustrating to me that meetings that I think are
> fairly important get scheduled on Friday and then nobody shows up for them
> because people already assumed that they could leave on Friday.   In that
> sense this proposal is a win for me, because it means I will not have to
> worry about that if I attend the Bangkok IETF.   But it seems like a waste
> of resources to hold informal meeting times when it's vanishingly unlikely
> that anyone at all will attend.
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Behcet Sarikaya <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 3:51 PM, Adam Roach <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>> Replying to the thread in general rather than any one message: most of
>>> the responses so far have been focusing on perceived efficacy of informal
>>> meetings on Friday (which is good feedback, although I suspect it will be
>>> better informed after the experiment is run).
>>>
>>> I have yet to see any comments on the fact that we have O(30) working
>>> groups ask not to be scheduled on Fridays every single meeting. One of my
>>> personal hopes for this experiment is that we learn whether we can avoid
>>> these requests (and the consequent scheduling complications, which are
>>> non-trivial) by simply removing the broadly unwanted Friday slots from
>>> consideration altogether.
>>>
>>> I am curious if anyone has thoughts about how this particular scheduling
>>> difficulty can be addressed beyond what we might learn from the Bangkok
>>> experiment.
>>>
>>>
>> It seems like the experiment will go ahead :-)
>>
>> My suggestion is:
>> either treat Friday as a regular work day and put complete scheduling on
>> that day. I don't think companies treat Fridays special, you work on Friday
>> like any other day, right?
>>
>>
>>
>> or completely make it off. Now we are including Saturday in the meeting
>> days and starting to eat up from the other side to make up for it, isn't
>> that strange?
>>
>>
>> Regarding flight times, if the meeting is overseas, airline companies
>> want you to stay one week, usually from Saturday/Sunday to next Saturday.
>> So in Bangkok, I am going to have to stay on Friday in order to get a
>> cheaper flight.
>>
>> Why not get back to the good old Sunday-Friday schedule?
>>
>> Behcet
>>
>>> /a
>>>
>>>
>>
>