Re: Remote participation fees [Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom ELEGIBILITY]

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Sun, 15 February 2015 00:16 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B7221A008A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 Feb 2015 16:16:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 CGd5_5ODQiQ4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 Feb 2015 16:16:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B19831A008F for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 14 Feb 2015 16:16:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DCE6BEC3; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 00:16:28 +0000 (GMT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wyX4eawZh8mQ; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 00:16:23 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [10.10.5.195] (unknown [216.127.117.11]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6FD13BEBE; Sun, 15 Feb 2015 00:16:22 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <54DFE555.3060809@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 00:16:21 +0000
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mary Barnes <mary.h.barnes@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Remote participation fees [Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom ELEGIBILITY]
References: <CAL0qLwZk=k-CWLte_ChK9f1kzLwMOTRyi7AwFa8fLjBsextBcA@mail.gmail.com> <9772.1420830216@sandelman.ca> <CAL0qLwZatYW2e4Wk6GXB2U26fsCn8BV2qt-07kHBugiq34zrcQ@mail.gmail.com> <6025.1423672358@sandelman.ca> <CAL0qLwYtE618sA99hgXP-5wk+BYdcXLbiZqd_36OreYQ1LB7hQ@mail.gmail.com> <54DBD71C.20101@joelhalpern.com> <26803.1423772214@sandelman.ca> <tsla90ikh85.fsf@mit.edu> <37661D4B-1842-4890-88FB-2A7B13CDC884@nominum.com> <CABmDk8m1KuSs8os9V7fcYOJC2O4yMb6dRFer+nEPBTTSHtey9Q@mail.gmail.com> <31891031-4628-49CD-B66C-38A3BD787B70@trammell.ch> <54DE7F09.8030500@gmail.com> <C5FC0DB6-82F8-4C38-ABFD-D5D9A6E65933@isoc.org.ec> <54DE90C6.6030609@gmail.com> <E39AF4E0-58AB-4249-8A37-3D1CD2D5A691@gmail.com> <54DE9844.1010807@gmail.com> <61FBB27B-4EF3-40A0-8981-00EB89698295@isoc.org.ec> <B90F5E29-06C5-41D1-9F31-1BE42382995F@gmail.com> <CABmDk8=YPZ1W2tTOqP23U2PFVLoDh-3+wwmcA8mpta-Y05op2A@mail.gmail.com> <54DFBAF6.30409@cs.tcd.ie> <CABmDk8nKHZZ0HQqgTSB=qc9wEbUaSOSsdKYyNjRf2wGF-XsLvQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABmDk8nKHZZ0HQqgTSB=qc9wEbUaSOSsdKYyNjRf2wGF-XsLvQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Vw_xb2qRzRSGJkJo1JRajjvNnVM>
Cc: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, Carlos Vera Quintana <cveraq@gmail.com>, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>, ietf <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sun, 15 Feb 2015 00:16:33 -0000


On 14/02/15 22:47, Mary Barnes wrote:
> I do recognize that
> quality isn't quite there yet, but it's pretty darn good and maybe good
> enough. 

My experience of being remote was that it was pretty good,
but for a lot of the WGs where I listened in, I was able to
recognise voices of folks I know, and was also able to use
jabber to ask various people there about the goings-on. I
don't think that'd be that common for remote participants,
and without it, the experience would have been much worse I
think. (But it'd be interesting to hear otherwise if that's
the case.)

And while remote listening (and the occasional prod via
jabber) was fairly workable for me, as others have noted
I don't think we're anywhere near solving the problem of
workable remote input in general.

I fully agree that we ought be working more on all of this
though.

S.