Re: [vmeet] IETF95 remote attendance

Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu> Fri, 15 April 2016 14:58 UTC

Return-Path: <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
X-Original-To: vmeet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vmeet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 378E912DF6E for <vmeet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 07:58:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.935
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.935 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=comcast.net
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 xZ7uIcnxu0zZ for <vmeet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 07:58:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resqmta-ch2-05v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-05v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:37]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B70712DF06 for <vmeet@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 07:58:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resomta-ch2-01v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.97]) by comcast with SMTP id r5BxatX2cBE6Or5C5a256I; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 14:58:01 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20140121; t=1460732281; bh=zfVrBRmYZXjPGSCZhZK7UaqlTLGj6dlkfHeDxo7Tbzs=; h=Received:Received:Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=ogZIcBna5q3uOoih/rMPvUkrZ3sXk9VQGfr/kJ85J44mzG2/RGucO5f/jEq7tJSxH 1zP+88KFefKO8wIXt18Jqhvzegf4sD/LrMjYV2iPw1uR/4S9Yhn53VQWo56+MDdbss em462BJPsVCWqW0aZVGirr3aaC6OKgFoA2Nwkkb4Cmrr5CTuGlGkH6fMJwKTBIhBc5 eFOSFTqioVdU3gNTO2qaufJ6DWs7m2WSJRuzuzBbhF5BgrD4eOV26SJ/jTLrpS7i1Y PtSVKgesUjDYpDFSr1A8pHmangMuAHUUcgtudlRRrrdaSx30pnm9gwIEuApPREJdpY LvyF2PmxBwAtQ==
Received: from Paul-Kyzivats-MacBook-Pro.local ([73.218.51.154]) by resomta-ch2-01v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id iey11s0083KdFy101ey1Q7; Fri, 15 Apr 2016 14:58:01 +0000
To: vmeet@ietf.org
References: <5710CA7F.3050207@meetecho.com> <5710CE07.9090104@gmail.com>
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <57110178.4030205@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 10:58:00 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5710CE07.9090104@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/vmeet/a1lmq4DR7ScpoM840IjUStvIuN4>
Subject: Re: [vmeet] IETF95 remote attendance
X-BeenThere: vmeet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF remote participation meeting services discussion <vmeet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/vmeet>, <mailto:vmeet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/vmeet/>
List-Post: <mailto:vmeet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:vmeet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vmeet>, <mailto:vmeet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 14:58:03 -0000

On 4/15/16 7:18 AM, Stewart Bryant wrote:
>
>
> On 15/04/2016 12:03, Meetecho IETF support wrote:
>> - 712 unique remote participants joined Meetecho through the week;
>> among these, 282 opted to also put their Registration ID.
>
> There was something odd about the registration number system.
>
> I tried to enter my registration number a few times but it rejected it
> every time.
>
> Since it did not REQUIRE(sic)  the registration number  I just used the
> option not to enter it.

I understand how linking to the registration could be helpful. But the 
registration number isn't something that sticks in your memory. So I had 
to look up my registration confirmation and copy/paste the number. Doing 
that *once* wouldn't be much of a bother. But doing it for every session 
I entered was.

I think we need to find a better system for this. Perhaps cookies could 
be used to remember this stuff for the duration of the week. Then at 
least it would only be necessary to enter it once per device.

	Thanks,
	Paul