Re: [Ietf108planning] Preview of survey on virtual meetings

["Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <[e-mail]>]

Several folks have expressed that the survey is too long.  I agree that it is long, but most of the questions that are being asked seem useful, and hence I’m not sure what can easily be cut that would make a significant different to its length.  However, I expect that the length of the survey may skew the feedback towards individuals who are more involved with IETF.  Is this okay?

If the accompanying email makes it clear why the survey is slightly longer, and that the data will be shared, then I would hope that we would still get reasonable engagement from the active IETF community.

Rob



From: Ietf108planning <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Jay Daley
Sent: 24 April 2020 04:33
To: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyncke=[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Ietf108planning] Preview of survey on virtual meetings




On 24/04/2020, at 12:19 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyncke=[e-mail]<mailto:evyncke=[e-mail]>> wrote:

Jay and others,

Please find below some comments on the survey.

"This survey is vital" isn't "vital" a little bit too much ?

Not really - otherwise we’re just guessing.


"As we are asking f" better expand the "we" ?

Will address that in the email that distributes the survey.



Wow what a strange way to select a country... Can we simply list them? (I love to see Belgium at the top for once :-) )

Replaced with regions.



In "Subscriber to an IETF mailing list within the last year" all other points use the past tense of a verb and not a noun.

That whole list needs paring down and that one can probably go.


In the same list, should we add "side meetings" ?

"How many IETF Meetings have you participated in, in total" is a little unclear, could we add 'physical and remote" ?

Tidied those up.



"If an in-person IETF meeting needs to be cancelled, should we hold a virtual IETF meeting instead?" should be qualified by a "one-week virtual IETF meeting" ?

We don’t want to assume it will be one week.  I’ve adjusted the wording by adding "replaced with" to make that clearer.



Is it "prioritize" or "force a meeting" for newly formed WG? I suggest the latter

I had to stop after a while because way too many questions, I am afraid...

All good.

thanks
Jay




-éric


-----Original Message-----
From: iesg <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> on behalf of Jay Daley <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Date: Thursday, 23 April 2020 at 02:27
To: The IESG <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: Preview of survey on virtual meetings

   The small group set up by the IESG, LLC and IRTF Chair [1] to plan for IETF 108 has developed a survey to be sent out as widely as possible to IETF/IRTF participants to get views on the Future of Virtual Meetings.  You are now welcome to preview the survey [2] and provide feedback.  You can create a surveymonkey account and comment directly on the preview or send comments to [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

   We are hoping to send this survey out on Tuesday 28 April US time so please have any comments in well before that.  The survey is expected to run for ~9 days, less than is ideal but necessary given the possible work ahead.

   If you have any suggestions on distribution then those are also most welcome.

   thanks
   Jay

   [1]  Alissa Cooper, Colin Perkins, Martin Duke, Alvaro Retana, Alexa Morris, Greg Wood, Jay Daley
   [2]  https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=wlD1DqfXW8oxNST4ldDKk4dUN9OVHPs_2BCNWKZzQXuRAPHQA8Dy3EFy08_2B14_2BJekO#<https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Preview/?sm=wlD1DqfXW8oxNST4ldDKk4dUN9OVHPs_2BCNWKZzQXuRAPHQA8Dy3EFy08_2B14_2BJekO>


   --
   Jay Daley
   IETF Executive Director
   [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>


--
Ietf108planning mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf108planning

--
Jay Daley
IETF Executive Director
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>