Re: Value of meeting attendance (was Re: [Recentattendees] Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF 100)

Stephen Strowes <stephen.strowes@gmail.com> Fri, 27 May 2016 18:40 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.strowes@gmail.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 87C7812DC4C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 May 2016 11:40:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 xPD841KZYEwq for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 May 2016 11:40:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x22e.google.com (mail-it0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07C7C12DC55 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 May 2016 11:40:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id l63so1747871ita.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 May 2016 11:40:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=8DnQXNkgWKOpzNIapp98r4Tbn+9rsmj26DNmXdUJOI0=; b=R9Bb8zbx8nsw+2sO120O4W/5bWpbRI9Wa+RvSJHsqx62qMvCqD7bn/+V6mQmg8cKOy /yHyuHVy2nxoLgGYpgX73cqjUpyp2YZKeAhv1CRJzUclIanhG3qRSbFbXXN8oRXxsOwv UhUzZ42nwitBYmxvupJnKDdeB3pTMAeoRZhens2KnmGZKHOtDB4f3Q91kYXUVkZPOCza WMzSNODsu7QbG/CD+GpAFW7vCbyVhh2+ZHTu8iancf+9pprrE4SK+I0JYfTKcRB09AKV qlpvQ66kqT1BGPdQ32NltYMC7HB2ee8fGVucppo73WhmLEbrYQo2m5/FmiIpiR2gb0Va swug==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=8DnQXNkgWKOpzNIapp98r4Tbn+9rsmj26DNmXdUJOI0=; b=GLIR70nOWADDQkOuSmQoK+79Br0XdbVPmverczReNsFhwIJlLTnCJD9fArrtMhPe4F 8603wrkRyedqalGTTOpenvDofreN9hvmYnySzV2RhtXlU113iB93aCzxvNTI+lLd2FWI 7ww5cHdJwQgZ2wCS7D3y2H2E2PT1E3SUtY7x372X6JUTzbsRZQD92r9xJdNEnh5gcw9x Shb2kdvlBnjCa2/VgzzH8dGV8B+4zc0zUDrGPWF4D8UZ2N3z3O/BYe1UWLWjbfNGp3BW /fm8HbkXpXmYjTR3Bc5T6pLjkyYRpMPgkukMCDAOzKwm8Tgpvd5YgeeznMkiDIlXbA2w LEOw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLWPNN6ZREvUKPLYzcRQdUNTv/MlDFQrBMf1tYxeK5v1LKqEIu5ngDJa8CxRF4zJGIhzfYxJkaCc+mxPA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.36.101.16 with SMTP id u16mr36237itb.33.1464374413401; Fri, 27 May 2016 11:40:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.107.46.167 with HTTP; Fri, 27 May 2016 11:40:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B37FF4C33@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
References: <20160525220818.18333.71186.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAKD1Yr2wyE8SVq_FBWvp5ipVNhqMDs0QnvyL7jJtbKKxCr3bGA@mail.gmail.com> <096736229B32B700FCB16703@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <20160527171221.GA20298@gsp.org> <e6572c1c-486f-025d-2495-955f98bd976c@comcast.net> <d000c22c-d4b5-7dcc-2406-7fe630fd3105@gmail.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B37FF4C33@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 11:40:13 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJbMJ33wdd+V7x_xbfPO=cD2yZYNcYtN4Er-i8Mjdfx=rmq8fQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Value of meeting attendance (was Re: [Recentattendees] Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF 100)
From: Stephen Strowes <stephen.strowes@gmail.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113f6514baa9280533d73c22
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/qmPX2dCqT7wNDoYH9_SG-ihk5ck>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Fri, 27 May 2016 18:40:24 -0000

On 27 May 2016 at 11:04, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>;
 wrote:

> Maybe we should hold our meetings in Minecraft :)
>
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3612641/Company-open-OFFICE-inside-virtual-world-Minecraft.html
>


Or second life:
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vmeet/current/msg00223.html

More seriously: meetecho has massively improved the ability to at least
track meetings remotely. It still feels like the "third wheel" relative to
in-person attendance, but it's been a move in a good direction.

S.



> ------------------------------
> From: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>;
> Sent: ‎27/‎05/‎2016 20:55
> To: ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: Value of meeting attendance (was Re: [Recentattendees]
> Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF 100)
>
> On 5/27/16 9:46 AM, Michael StJohns wrote:
> > I would expect that we as an organization will continue to meet in
> > person for probably the life of the organization.  We as humans are a
> > social species, and, even with all the sturm und drang that's been on
> > the various mailing list with respect to the meeting venue topics - at
> > the end we will find more benefit than not to meet in person.
>
> I think so, as well, but that doesn't mean that we can't
> work to de-emphasize physical meetings - the choices aren't
> between maintaining the status quo on the one hand or
> completely eliminating meetings on the other.  (I know
> you believe this as well this but it wasn't brought out in
> what you wrote).
>
> My own experience has been that it is possible to maintain
> a good working relationship with the organization and to move
> work along even while attending meetings sporadically, but it
> does take some initiative on your own part, an understanding
> of who to contact and how to contact them about various pieces
> of work, and some sensitivity to remote participation issues
> on the part of working group chairs.  Unfortunately the second
> issue (an understanding of how to keep work rolling) does take
> a bit of IETF experience to develop.
>
> Melinda
>
>