Presentation vs. Discussion sessions (was: PowerPoint considered harmful)
Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> Sun, 02 December 2012 18:37 UTC
Return-Path: <moore@network-heretics.com>
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 BB71721F85D1 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Dec 2012 10:37:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F-jorFh0rOgf for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Dec 2012 10:37:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4FFC21F85BC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 2 Dec 2012 10:37:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.46]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id 573D220BE8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 2 Dec 2012 13:37:34 -0500 (EST)
Received: from frontend2.nyi.mail.srv.osa ([10.202.2.161]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 02 Dec 2012 13:37:34 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=smtpout; bh=8XQe41zP2evFlaB4B6CQEt 4FJLA=; b=o3z6brZ51u+fTmHd5TjvQEY4A/ZLo2o9HlKCq+j0dSVCtrHfVrnqQg B1c7yDXdHJYINJh12/+ZyywKehKpyVbBGq4thBZWyPo4uS63Lp0QAaM7yJn9Bqty YVGayWf/xLk3H2fFqT+CxiJ0Im54IsHD704Q6Eki0O1RKcfC5VukE=
X-Sasl-enc: KpvjSgkO5IT0Ffaunz4j9TWslgOTtRcrw6Y/9HuWmK9t 1354473453
Received: from [192.168.1.20] (unknown [65.16.145.177]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 79464482651; Sun, 2 Dec 2012 13:37:33 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <50BB9FE6.5000000@network-heretics.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2012 13:37:26 -0500
From: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Presentation vs. Discussion sessions (was: PowerPoint considered harmful)
References: <CAC4RtVCogYS4tmY1LLi0C-E+B+di2_wTD0N-=AZrVR7-A8Mz+A@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20121128023905.0afdcde0@resistor.net> <50B683C4.2030503@stpeter.im> <50B68612.7080107@dcrocker.net> <50B693ED.7000609@stpeter.im> <50B696B0.30904@qti.qualcomm.com> <CAC4RtVAG+pKSQMwPyB6GJ7jxJM4hNpU81Yt8he6ZsEMrg_rTbQ@mail.gmail.com> <00c001cdce7a$d9fa6490$8def2db0$@asgard.org> <50B7EA5D.2030803@qti.qualcomm.com> <50BA18B8.3090306@network-heretics.com> <p06240609cce032de76ff@dhcp184-48-45-14.hroa.orl.wayport.net> <m2obidvuv7.wl%randy@psg.com> <p0624060ccce0b42ffc47@dhcp184-48-45-14.hroa.orl.wayport.net> <50BB10FF.6090105@gmail.com> <50BB5A69.40107@network-heretics.com> <17CDABC9DDB6E00CE9A36B15@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <50BB6B61.4040304@network-heretics.com> <3717C2CC54EB3B1A8E3E8EEA@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <50BB6FC8.8040907@network-heretics.com> <50BB8DA8.5070406@joelhalpern.com> <AEDAFA38A99E8B0E926BAC0F@JcK-HP8200.jck. com> <50BB96C4.2080908@network-heretics.com> <50BB98B0.2060100@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <50BB98B0.2060100@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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, 02 Dec 2012 18:37:35 -0000
On 12/02/2012 01:06 PM, Melinda Shore wrote: > There's a whole nexus of connected issues here, I think, and what > a given person complains about depends on that person's pet peeves. > It seems to me that if we were better about moving work forward > between meetings (<- peeve!) meeting time wouldn't be chewed up > with presenting the current state of the work. While I fully agree that most WGs could be better at moving work forward between meetings, I don't think it would solve the problem of face to face meeting time being filled up with presentations. I suspect that most WG participants have difficulty keeping up with the traffic on their WGs' mailing lists for various reasons (too much "distraction" from normal work, the sad state of mail user agents, etc.). By forcing people to travel away from work, face-to-face meetings serve as useful interruptions from normal distractions and opportunities to catch up on IETF work. If working groups moved forward even faster than they do now, that might actually be seen to increase the need for presentations at face-to-face meetings. Occasionally I've wondered if IETF meetings should have "presentation" sessions separate from (and in advance of) "working" sessions. The difference between the two types of session would be clearly indicated in the schedule. The presentation sessions would be geared toward presenting an overview of current state of the proposals, including a summary of recent changes. Perhaps participants would be allowed to ask questions for clarification, but discussion should be discouraged and any kind of polling of the room or other decision making would be forbidden. The presentation meetings would therefore be optional for those who had kept up on the mailing list. And presentations would be forbidden in discussion sessions. I can imagine these being useful in several ways, e.g. in facilitating better cross-group and cross-area review. People who were active participants in working groups could attend presentation sessions of other groups, without sacrificing their attendance in the discussion sessions of the groups in which they were active. Perhaps roughly the first 2(?) days of an IETF meeting could be largely devoted to presentation sessions, and the remainder of the time to discussion sessions. Having a strict allocation of time for each kind of session isn't so important as having the presentation sessions for a particular group well in advance of the discussion session for that group. This is something that could be tried on a small scale, by a few working groups (say one in each area) before being widely adopted. It might help, however, to have explicit support for the idea in the tools that maintain and display the meeting schedules. Keith
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" t.p.
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Melinda Shore
- "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Barry Leiba
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Marc Blanchet
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" joel jaeggli
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" ned+ietf
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Andrew Sullivan
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Geoff Huston
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" David Meyer
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" John C Klensin
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" SM
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" David Morris
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Joe Touch
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Hector Santos
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" John Leslie
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Donald Eastlake
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Brian E Carpenter
- RE: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" John C Klensin
- Barely literate minutes (was: "IETF work is done … SM
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Randy Bush
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Yoav Nir
- RE: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" tglassey
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Keith Moore
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Dave Crocker
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Eliot Lear
- Pre-IETF work ( was - Re: "IETF work is done on t… Dave Crocker
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Barely literate minutes (was: "IETF work is d… John C Klensin
- Re: Barely literate minutes Scott Brim
- Re: Barely literate minutes Sam Hartman
- Re: Barely literate minutes Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: Barely literate minutes Dave Crocker
- Re: Barely literate minutes Sam Hartman
- Re: Barely literate minutes Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Alessandro Vesely
- Re: Barely literate minutes Pete Resnick
- Re: Barely literate minutes Randy Bush
- Re: Barely literate minutes Dave Crocker
- Re: Barely literate minutes SM
- Re: Barely literate minutes Bob Hinden
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Geoff Huston
- Re: Barely literate minutes John C Klensin
- RE: Barely literate minutes Hutton, Andrew
- Re: Barely literate minutes t.p.
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Eliot Lear
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Edward Lewis
- Re: Barely literate minutes Barry Leiba
- Re: Barely literate minutes Dave Crocker
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" SM
- RE: Barely literate minutes Lee Howard
- Re: Barely literate minutes Randy Bush
- Re: Barely literate minutes Pete Resnick
- Re: Barely literate minutes Suresh Krishnan
- Re: Barely literate minutes Fernando Gont
- Re: Barely literate minutes Keith Moore
- PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely lit… Keith Moore
- Re: Barely literate minutes Dave Crocker
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… Randall Gellens
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… Randy Bush
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… Melinda Shore
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… Randall Gellens
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… Keith Moore
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… SM
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… Keith Moore
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… John C Klensin
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… Keith Moore
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… John C Klensin
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… Keith Moore
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… John Levine
- English spoken here (was: PowerPoint considered h… SM
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: English spoken here (was: PowerPoint consider… John C Klensin
- Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken here) Dave Crocker
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… John C Klensin
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Keith Moore
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Dave Crocker
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… Keith Moore
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Keith Moore
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… Melinda Shore
- Presentation vs. Discussion sessions (was: PowerP… Keith Moore
- Re: Presentation vs. Discussion sessions Melinda Shore
- Re: PowerPoint considered harmful (was Re: Barely… Randall Gellens
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… joel jaeggli
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Keith Moore
- Re: Presentation vs. Discussion sessions Keith Moore
- Re: Presentation vs. Discussion sessions Melinda Shore
- Re: Presentation vs. Discussion sessions Keith Moore
- Acculturation [was Re: PowerPoint considered harm… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: English spoken here (was: PowerPoint consider… SM
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… joel jaeggli
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Keith Moore
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Joel jaeggli
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Randy Bush
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Keith Moore
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Joel jaeggli
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Randy Bush
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… joel jaeggli
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Dave Crocker
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Melinda Shore
- Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists" Tim Chown
- RE: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… George, Wes
- RE: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… George, Wes
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Keith Moore
- RE: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… George, Wes
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Tim Chown
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Keith Moore
- Re: English spoken here (was: PowerPoint consider… Steven Bellovin
- Re: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Tony Hansen
- RE: Useful slide tex (was - Re: English spoken he… Lee Howard
- Re: English spoken here Keith Moore
- Re: English spoken here Steven Bellovin
- Re: English spoken here John C Klensin
- Re: Presentation vs. Discussion sessions (was: Po… Randall Gellens