Re: Feedback from IETF 120 Vancouver post-meeting survey

Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 02 September 2024 16:53 UTC

Return-Path: <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C146C14F70D; Mon, 2 Sep 2024 09:53:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nAlrQ7ytdiEM; Mon, 2 Sep 2024 09:53:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ej1-x630.google.com (mail-ej1-x630.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::630]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B99D2C14F6BE; Mon, 2 Sep 2024 09:53:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ej1-x630.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a869332c2c2so865006866b.0; Mon, 02 Sep 2024 09:53:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1725295984; x=1725900784; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=valUGkbAQzS0DVUiUSPoHIr9h5y5yyzjZopNIOzG8+U=; b=KBhS++0g3mLkD4QCHuVJ1G/FhCzd2b4OpveWkEQ41U7/Ss5QXn+DbD/MW/hWb8Yo+I zlfDuUcMFXJjVxS+tX97AucTggG2ePwU5uUhkMrQFPY1YdiotkcT0nUk1Nt1NEqqSvwn rGPBb56VhAFpCF5/tib4FSSMAGfW0Mk+guHpNXDtTTBXIKapb2+IRn2M/N6UsO0hlaJV cmeWsxls5U/C0ayIe/fRR8tZGe3Lt7XAd3UGh7Q7gBGGAgoUC0gq/sALh2K8Da73+eiM t8Na5DMkv1aK0fM6xJplrY89SuTw1FORnN5nzrb89Z24m1Tw42ghXizBpjE9pL0bDsUy jMWQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1725295984; x=1725900784; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=valUGkbAQzS0DVUiUSPoHIr9h5y5yyzjZopNIOzG8+U=; b=p2vzzgr4UDj+alnR37LGtQM8x733icZWNeym2TEpauZ4/2k8i3Qq/FJxpAGVr1c5ix HR9HqIC0uGDzMX+C/zTLT7wzYuDqxOy/CMo4ICqLf8HYFA8Zil0emRITDVH05idmPJQX ksT6OWMp9aCOMZ5fnh9GdSQe2Zur1jkEMee8zxTS+zlPZEc53rIBz8fRiMw1Y14s3eTF 0bQFicxiSEpzqerFSMiT5V09Y2lCQsoIKjiQWNAfbfMyd2rbFL4TUCcucBcIM4S6PIQv 0UNYAKBh8x8jyp4XX1ziymqNip52YZKfGynxExPzFqTyNtABybdNHbZCVQJeO6WWl/w+ rENw==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVtiledpitl8LG8Zx3XGR1SE9AkCi0uv6A2YX4DuXLVb2ThOM/xvMOooL9xM7Su8nEV/lprBJRoUA==@ietf.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwB8ihtQBYHvDOJSpr1b0w/d7L1ms7iyq8RMOk/ygOa14Ybisa+ sWzjPo50Juod/gY6nR2O4TBej2yIQuK+o8UgevBSF/JVb+3I8mfd1dVgqXbrc+YFFnpc6PoXrmx obSNL3XrszUl/vx1tW//iYN0BMaU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEKOJkUpaou/EssELZdiGVEMxIPyMWN/EGFPIgV6mrDeMxdd2UGlc6KbtP3vblysnjGwqADS+l84lHWQhIqfaA=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:3188:b0:a72:4207:479b with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a898231e941mr1424138066b.5.1725295983436; Mon, 02 Sep 2024 09:53:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <7487E6AA-A8BE-42A9-9E80-F85C49ABF026@ietf.org> <CAHbuEH72xCnM6_F+A+jP3nPkNY2sHa_zG4Skbhdu40SBgXSdcA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHbuEH72xCnM6_F+A+jP3nPkNY2sHa_zG4Skbhdu40SBgXSdcA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2024 12:52:51 -0400
Message-ID: <CADyWQ+HtD3XM2qZ-EtNDNzD7ar-2v9DQUvG6PCqGVxh3JS413w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Feedback from IETF 120 Vancouver post-meeting survey
To: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000039aac2062125c61e"
Message-ID-Hash: 6EIU4MMSPZQIWTMURNOI2IFSGGESZFKY
X-Message-ID-Hash: 6EIU4MMSPZQIWTMURNOI2IFSGGESZFKY
X-MailFrom: tjw.ietf@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-wgchairs.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: wgchairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/BLKsqgCUkbzQ04x_cOPUAM6WEp0>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wgchairs>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:wgchairs-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:wgchairs-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:wgchairs-leave@ietf.org>

Kathleen,

On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 12:42 PM Kathleen Moriarty <
kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thank you, Jay.
>
> The summary is helpful. I'm going to counter the first point, the chat
> facilitates the flow of a meeting, enabling a level of feedback that is not
> appropriate for the Mic line, yet helpful in terms of another layer of
> feedback. Many contribute to it knowing that some will catch up later and
> that is fine. One person is tagged with monitoring in order to bring to the
> Mic line the layer needed (the person who may be remote can request the
> item be stated in the Mic line.
>
>
What I emailed Jay (dang reply/reply-all) was that we started doing in
DNSOP was to include the jabber logs with the minutes (with some cleanup)
so forgetful chairs like myself could grep one document.

Zulip has a link that gets posted that we put in the minutes now, but I
have thought of doing some json->text munging.
I find it easier to have it all in one place

tim





This format does not work well outside of the IETF and may be an adjustment
> to some new to the IETF. However, we have a lot of high-bandwidth people
> involved in the IETF and this is an outlet for them to get work done
> (provide review, provide feedback, engage in discussion to understand
> points on a presentation another in the chat can respond to, etc.). For
> many of us, the chat is very important and would not have been noted as
> we've grown accustomed to it.  However, this format is really hard to use
> in many other settings as it is too much for a lot of people to manage both
> listening and using chat.
>
> It is well suited to a lot of participants of the IETF and makes meetings
> a bit faster so we get more accomplished.
>
> Best regards,
> Kathleen
>
> On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 12:12 PM Jay Daley <exec-director@ietf.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi all
>>
>> There were a number of aspects to the feedback in the post-IETF 120
>> meeting survey that are worth highlighting and updating you on.
>>
>> 1.  Comments that the in-session chat is a distraction. This is one we
>> will monitor and possibly ask specific questions about in the next
>> post-meeting survey.  There was a suggestion of explicit pauses in sessions
>> to allow people, particularly presenters, to catch up with the chat but I
>> have no idea how practical that is.
>>
>> 2.  Comments about managing slides and presentations, that we will pass
>> on to Meetecho.
>>
>> 3.  Comments about the use of screen space in rooms and how that can be
>> improved.  The meetings operations team are reviewing this and we’ll see
>> what improvements we can make.
>>
>> As a reminder, the survey dashboard is at [1] and the last question, Q27,
>> has the free form comments.
>>
>> cheers
>> Jay
>>
>>
>> [1]
>> https://ietf.co1.qualtrics.com/results/public/aWV0Zi1VUl8zT3laRG9JQWxidUkxZ0otNjZjMzQwNWI4ZjhlYTQwMDA4Nzg5MjNi#/pages/Page_1fe9399e-cacb-4063-af49-ee1340c57993
>>
>> --
>> Jay Daley
>> IETF Executive Director
>> exec-director@ietf.org
>>
>>
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
> Kathleen
>