Re: In person versus virtual?

Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org> Wed, 11 March 2020 13:07 UTC

Return-Path: <chopps@chopps.org>
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 D61213A18A0 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 06:07:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 TnklzcD5UJOx for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 06:07:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.chopps.org (smtp.chopps.org [54.88.81.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DAA93A18B4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 06:07:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stubbs.int.chopps.org (047-050-069-038.biz.spectrum.com [47.50.69.38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by smtp.chopps.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6474060D6E; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:07:35 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.40.2.2.4\))
Subject: Re: In person versus virtual?
From: Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>
In-Reply-To: <CA6C4C62-48AD-4649-B415-EE75E86E35B1@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 09:07:34 -0400
Cc: Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>, Eliot Lear <lear=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, ietf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2CDBFC67-EC64-4A72-9BBC-FAFBFDBCD443@chopps.org>
References: <158386742797.16091.1025684270011519738@ietfa.amsl.com> <ee2c28db-5b83-3f9c-bfb5-adbacdce6fc4@acm.org> <92890c4b-c109-d0f4-e6b7-c06a9d6a696c@acm.org> <88e61108-6bb3-0bac-d6f1-d5a0f7ffa538@joelhalpern.com> <96e3b1c7-b187-7c9e-4be1-0e82fee719c1@acm.org> <CB06C93B-56BE-41F7-BB97-2146752B38F2@cisco.com> <CA6C4C62-48AD-4649-B415-EE75E86E35B1@gmail.com>
To: Tim Chown <tjc.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.40.2.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/LI02UY1xxT7Wu3XZEnfHEK5uqRw>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 11 Mar 2020 13:07:38 -0000


> On Mar 11, 2020, at 8:07 AM, Tim Chown <tjc.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 11 Mar 2020, at 07:40, Eliot Lear <lear=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>> 
>> You may be referring to a draft I wrote, draft-lear-we-gotta-stop-meeting-like-this-00.txt, or maybe to comments made by others in various IETF threads. 
>> 
>> My intuition tells me we should probably not meet 3x per year in person, but something less, like 2x, if for no other reason, to save the environment.  But my intuition is not enough to make good decisions.  It seems to me that some data is required, which is why I wrote that draft.  Let’s get data, in order to understand what are the most effective collaboration modalities for this organization.
>> 
>> I was aiming for an experiment some years down the road, but here we are.  Let’s make the most of it and collect what data we can.
> 
> I think two physical meetings leaving more room for two virtual meetings per WG in between would be a good path to follow.  Less travel, less carbon, and perhaps four draft deadlines that way rather than three, spreading the work over the year better.

It would be nice if instead of having to reply to the "replace in person with virtual meetings" threads we had a single wiki page peoples opinions on it, once. That way everyone wouldn't have to keep responding in fear that if I don't someone might actually start to think they agree. I don't think an RFC labeled "we-gotta-stop-meeting-like-this" is where id' want my opposing opinion to be published though. And publishing a doc isn't going to keep these threads from coming back, b/c it's so much easier to just send another email.

Thanks,
Chris.

> 
> Tim
>