Re: [Manycouches] DOGFOOD Virtual BoF

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hiya,

Minor disagreements below:-)

On 12/02/2020 02:03, Ted Lemon wrote:
> The right way to do this is for people who are doing useful work in
> the IETF to simply transact all their work on the mailing lists and
> in virtual interims, and refuse to participate in in-person meetings
> either entirely, or to some extent.

I find it invaluable to have met people f2f, and more
than once is much more than once. I don't think that
it'd be a good goal to try avoid that. I don't need to
meet 'em three times every year though.

> 
> But if we take as a given that important work is done in person, and
> that you can’t be effective in the IETF without flying three times a
> year, then no amount of fancy remote attendance is going to help.

Important work is done f2f and that ought continue to
be the case I think. Equally, a small amount of folks
are very effective without any f2f meetings. However,
while we ought I think aim to decrease travel we also
need to bear in mind that there's a lot more than words
or images that could be in text/audio/video going on
when we meet f2f, and that those non-verbal things are
really helpful.

> It’s just a time-consuming rathole—when I brought this up in Prague,
> many of the conversations I had with people were about how to reduce
> latency to the point where remote attendees wouldn’t be
> inconvenienced.   Physics is against us here—that’s not the answer.
As a minor point, I don't think latency is the big
barrier for remote attendance. Timezone mismatches
are the pyhsics-biggie.

Cheers,
S.