Re: WG meeting structure

[Ole Troan <[e-mail]>]

The current microphone line isn't as much a discussion as it is a serialized set of independent one way comments.
Allowing for a 1:1 exchange between the presenter/author and the commentor.

I like Pete's proposal.
I would run it so that who had the "hot seats" were reshuffled per presentation/topic.
It might require more preparation ahead of time. A clearer definition of open issues to discuss, and perhaps some prepping of individuals to encourage them to take the  seats for particular topics.

I think it would foster a much more healthy active participation, and also be a good block for documents that have few supporters apart from the authors, but also few opponents.

Ole



> On 15 May 2019, at 08:59, Valery Smyslov <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Pete,
> 
> what I've been always liking in IETF room setup is that the floor mics
> make discussion self-organized - those who want to discuss form a line
> and speak one past one, making easy for listeners to identify who is
> speaking and to follow the discussion. Yes, it makes the discussion 
> slower than it could be if people can speak from their seats.
> 
> But the problem, as I see it, with your suggested setup is that 
> if there are more than a few folks willing to speak (each with
> his/her own mic), then there is usually a need for some moderator,
> who will give them a right to speak. Otherwise we'll hear either noise 
> or mostly only most active (or quick) speakers. The WG chairs can be 
> moderators, but any moderation is somewhat subjective and you
> need to indicate a willingness to speak to moderators (e.g. sitting
> for a long time with hand raised). 
> 
> And I participated remotely in a QUICK session with such room setup 
> (that was a few meeting ago). From my recollection I had somewhat 
> bad experience from it, because I had hard time trying to identify who was 
> speaking (folks often forgot to introduce themselves and jabber scribe
> didn't help much since he/she probably had the same problem)
> and as far as I remember sometimes it happened that speakers talked simultaneously,
> making impossible to understand them for remote participants.
> 
> So, I believe this setup is suited for small groups with 3-5 active speakers.
> 
> Regards,
> Valery Smyslov.
> 
> 
>> In part inspired by Dave Taht's thread on the IETF list; in part
>> something I've been thinking about for some time.
>> 
>> Some of us chairs would like more discussing and less presenting in WG
>> sessions. Even for the largest of WG sessions, I tend to see one or two
>> dozen people coming to the mic and discussing, and the rest just
>> visiting, so this is not an inconceivable idea for most WGs. Getting
>> this accomplished is in part having the chairs structure the agenda
>> somewhat differently, and we should really start discussing ways to
>> accomplish that. But a practical tool to promote discussion is changing
>> the room layout. The secretariat has already said that they're willing
>> to set up something like this if there are enough takers, and I know a
>> few chairs (including myself) who really want this, but I'd like to know
>> if we've got enough critical mass to try this out, at least for one or
>> two rooms:
>> 
>> The idea is to set up the room like this (check out this ASCII art!):
>> 
>>              +------+
>>              |screen|
>>              +------+
>>   X  X  X  O +-+  +-+ O  X  X  X
>>   X  X  X  O | |  | | O  X  X  X
>>   X  X  X  O |T|  |T| O  X  X  X
>>   X  X  X  O |a|  |a| O  X  X  X
>>   X  X  X  O |b|  |b| O  X  X  X
>>   X  X  X  O |l|  |l| O  X  X  X
>>   X  X  X  O |e|  |e| O  X  X  X
>>   X  X  X  O | |  | | O  X  X  X
>>   X  X  X  O | |__| | O  X  X  X
>>            O +______+ O
>>    M        O  O  O  O        M
>>       X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X
>>       X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X
>>       X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X
>>       X  X  X  X  X  X  X  X
>> 
>> Basically, the idea is to have U-shaped table setup, with the screen up
>> at the open end. You'd get people at the table all the way around (the
>> Os) who plan to participate in the discussion. (I've also seen this done
>> with nested tables for more folks in the discussion.) Rows behind (in 3
>> directions; the Xs) are for folks who plan to mostly just listen; those
>> could fill the rest of the room and could probably scale to 100 or more
>> seats depending on the size of the room. There would be a few wireless
>> mics to pass around the tables, with perhaps a fixed mic at the bottom
>> of the U for the WG chairs, and a couple of floor mics (the Ms) for
>> folks who aren't around the table who happen to have comments.
>> 
>> How many of you be willing to run a WG session this way if the setup was
>> offered?
>> 
>> pr
>> --
>> Pete Resnick http://www.episteme.net/
>> All connections to the world are tenuous at best
>