Re: Remote participation fees - do we need projectors?

t.p. <> Mon, 16 February 2015 10:53 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E16B91A87C5 for <>; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 02:53:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.002
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f49jgix0DcG5 for <>; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 02:52:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fe00::775]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 598A51A0158 for <>; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 02:52:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pc6 ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 10:52:37 +0000
Message-ID: <00cc01d049d6$6dba4fa0$>
From: t.p. <>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <>
References: <> <>
Subject: Re: Remote participation fees - do we need projectors?
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 09:14:52 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-Originating-IP: []
X-ClientProxiedBy: ( To (
Authentication-Results:; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;
X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:AMSPR07MB245;
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:;
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004); SRVR:AMSPR07MB245;
X-Forefront-PRVS: 0489CFBAC9
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(51704005)(377454003)(13464003)(24454002)(110136001)(19580405001)(50986999)(19580395003)(92566002)(76176999)(81686999)(14496001)(86362001)(87976001)(84392001)(66066001)(47776003)(62236002)(44716002)(23676002)(62966003)(77156002)(77096005)(122386002)(46102003)(50226001)(42186005)(116806002)(61296003)(33646002)(50466002)(44736004)(40100003)(74416001)(7726001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:AMSPR07MB245; H:pc6; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en;
X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:AMSPR07MB245;
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Feb 2015 10:52:37.0341 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AMSPR07MB245
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 10:53:01 -0000

--- Original Message -----
From: "Phillip Hallam-Baker" <>
To: "Christer Holmberg" <>
Cc: "John C Klensin" <>om>; "John Leslie" <>et>;
Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2015 11:44 PM
> On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Christer Holmberg <
>> wrote:
> > Do we really need projectors during the WG sessions?
> >
> > Most participants have laptops/tablets where they could watch the
> >
> > ...and the presenter should keep his/her eyes on the audience, not
> > slides :)
> >
> > Not sure how big (if any) impact removing the projectors would have
on the
> > participation fee, but at least it would give a little more
> > when it comes to finding suitable meeting rooms, as a projector is
> > required.
> As with most other hotel charges, they are merely ways to conceal the
> not ways to bring it down.
> If technology worked reliably, I would have no trouble reading slides
on my
> laptop. But lets face it, technology is rubbish. It took me a whole
> session just getting Jabber working in Honolulu because the client I
> been using had decided on an obnoxious upgrade policy which required
me to
> replace it.
> Since Open Office can't read Powerpoint slides whatever they claim,
> slides working on a machine is hardly a seamless user experience as
> have to battle through the n x m compatibility matrix.
> We have enough problems getting presenter's slides working.

That is my overriding memory of London, not just from Monday morning but
from whenever a WG Chair first encountered the projectors.  The problem,
commonly, was one of aspect ratios, of the projector and laptop having
different views of what the representation should be.  Somewhere, I have
a note of how long - 5 to 10 minutes - each of the sessions was late in

As a presenter myself, I was taught to rehearse and rehearse until it
all went off pat, and that included all the technology.  Yet WG Chairs
would turn up at 09:00, e.g., and expect to have the 'Note Well' on
display by 09:01:-(

Tom Petch

> Having done the usability thing back in the day, it is instructive to
ask a
> UNIX/Windows/Mac sysadmin how easy they find a task they do every 3-4
> months or so  and then videotape them performing said task and then
> the video back to them.