Re: [vmeet] Suggestion

[Meetecho IETF support <[e-mail]>]

Hi Dave,

> From my experience this week, the biggest deficiency is queue
> management.  The virtual queue, for remote participants, worked
> usefully, but have in-room folk be in a separate queue creates a
> juggling problem operationally.  Things will get far simpler if/when
> we figure out a workable way to get in-room folk also be listed in
> the virtual queue.

as you may remember, this feature is already there. Please have a look 
at the two different experiments we proposed in Dallas at IETF-92, 
described here:

	http://ietf92.conf.meetecho.com/index.php/UMPIRE_Project

The second video tutorial (experiment #2) shows how you can join the 
virtual queue as in-room participant.

Somebody also suggested to print a QR code on the badges, which you can 
scan in order to avoid to manually put your name and Reg ID.

Cheers,
the Meetecho team

Il 08/04/2016 19:57, Dave Crocker ha scritto:
> On 4/8/2016 10:03 AM, Ray Pelletier wrote:
>> I really like the idea of the chair cockpit.  For example, we could
>>  get Meetecho to pre-load the slides that have been loaded in to
>> the tools site (and all of the associated drafts), have their
>> laptop connected to both projectors, and have their laptop be the
>> place where you navigate the decks.  The meetecho team was
>> fantastically helpful this week, springing into action whenever you
>> said their name in the jabber channel.  That could be made more
>> discoverable in a tweaked UI.
>
>
> In practical terms, this needs one person focused on running the
> meeting and a second person, sitting next to the first, running the
> meeting's integrated tech cockpit.
>
> More generally:
>
> We should formulate basic operational scenarios for each relevant
> actor (chair running the meeting, chair operating the cockpit,
> presenters in the room, presenters not in the room, audience in the
> room, audience not in the room.
>
> And we should formulate templates for how they interact.
>
> I think we are remarkably close to being able to make things work
> quite well.  Maybe not reaching the magical 'seamlessly', but quite
> well.
>
> From my experience this week, the biggest deficiency is queue
> management.  The virtual queue, for remote participants, worked
> usefully, but have in-room folk be in a separate queue creates a
> juggling problem operationally.  Things will get far simpler if/when
> we figure out a workable way to get in-room folk also be listed in
> the virtual queue.[*]
>
> I suspect there is also an issue with the virtual queue, in terms of
>  remote hubs, if they also have in-room microphones.
>
> Anyhow, defining the scenarios we want to support and targeting them
> is what we should do.  And if we want this to be real for IETF 100,
> we'd better target a serious dress rehearsal for IETF 98.
>
> d/
>
> [*] I suspect we are also going to want two or more cameras in a
> room, so that folk can see chairs, in-room speaker, and
> audience-at-microphone simultaneously.
>