Re: Agenda experiment for IETF 103 in November in Bangkok

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hiya,

On 14/05/18 21:51, Adam Roach 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'm happy to see the experiment tried. At the same time I agree with
those who are doubting that Friday is likely a productive time for
informal interactions. I suspect that should flight timing permit, I'd
be likely to take an earlier flight home than gamble on finding the
time on Friday productive. But we'll see I guess.

> 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.

My suggestion for a next experiment would be to (optionally) cancel
all sessions Friday, or leave Friday alone, but to move the formal
session start times to 11am (or whenever) Monday to Wednesday, and
run the hackathon continuously Sun-Wed, with 0900-1100 only for
hackathon or informal work. In running such an experiment, I'd be
fine if the IESG decided however it wanted which wGs get what formal
session time for one meeting like that. (And then see how it went,
just like with all experiments.)

But again, thanks to the IESG for being willing to experiment with
meeting session planning. Please keep doing that.

Cheers,
S.

> 
> /a
> 
>