Re: mic lines not working as well as they used to...

["Acee Lindem (acee)" <[e-mail]>]

From: Toerless Eckert <[e-mail]>
Date: Wednesday, November 23, 2022 at 6:03 PM
To: Acee Lindem (acee) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>, Working Group Chairs <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: mic lines not working as well as they used to...
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 10:53:13PM +0000, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
> Given the significant effort to normalize the on-site vs remote participation experience, perhaps the IETF should have the same (or very nearly the same) registration fee for both types of participation.

I am sure that would kick quite a few participants off the IETF due to cost issues for them.
And i am not sure how well our current "pay as you can" options can be stretched and/or
would be understood by everybody.

As your recounted experience demonstrates, there shouldn’t be a disadvantage to attending onsite.

Thanks,
Acee



Cheers
    Toerless
>
> Thanks,
> Acee
>
> From: WGChairs <[e-mail]> on behalf of Toerless Eckert <[e-mail]>
> Date: Wednesday, November 23, 2022 at 5:32 PM
> To: Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>
> Cc: Working Group Chairs <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: mic lines not working as well as they used to...
> This time around i had a case where i was patiently waiting on the microphone
> line in a WG room for probably 10 minutes and then was simply asked by the remote
> chair to step away because i had forgotten to put myself into the virtual queue.
>
> In that chairs defense, i do not know if he could see the physical microphone line
> in the room or not, but the delegate in the room also just did not say anthing,
> so i could not participate in the discussion. I have seen this situation being
> handled a lot more friendly in other WGs though. So there is definitely a
> lot of freedom today already for WG chairs to either be sticklers to the rules
> or to foster a collegial discussion atmosphere. My compromise as a WG chair
> is to allow each person on the local microphone ONCE in a meeting to have missed
> getting into the virtual line for example.
>
> With that and similar experiences, i'd say its certainly an issue we struggle with.
>
> I am very much a fan of the virtual queue given how i too never
> understand peoples names when being mumbled at the microphone. Alas i do not
> find the meetecho lite to be particularily easy to use tool on the mobile phone.
>
> An actual app might help to avoid having to click through ietf web pages and typing
> in login information repeatedly to use meetecho lite. At least that's what troubles
> me with the phone option currently.
>
> An nfc reader attached to the microphone in the room line would even be better.
> You just pass by with whatever registered NFC you have, then you see your name
> pop up on the room screen and e voila. Could have the NFC on your badge
> holder. Good reason to re-use badge-holders across IETFs and avoid the waste.
>
> Cheers
>     Toerless
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 03:02:27PM +0000, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> >
> > Hiya,
> >
> > I think we're making a bit of a mistake in requiring people
> > who are in the room at meetings to join the meetecho queue
> > before they join the physical mic line. It's not an end of
> > the world thing, but I think it is a bit damaging.
> >
> > The results of what we've done this year seem to me to be
> > that:
> >
> > - fewer people join mic lines overall
> > - there's almost no real discussion of topics raised
> >   at the mic as there used be
> >
> > I realise that being fair to remote participants needs to
> > be a hard requirement, but I think we've gone a bit too far
> > and ought back off some, e.g. to where we encourage but
> > don't require people (whether remote or in-person) to join
> > the meetecho queue. I think we ought also encourage more
> > discussion at the mic (for both remote and in-person folks)
> > and not be so fixated on the order in which people appeared
> > in the meetecho queue. That requires a bit more chairing
> > but that's why we're supposedly at the front of the room.
> >
> > But, maybe others like the current rigid setup or haven't
> > found the lack of mic-line discussion a problem?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > S.

--
---
[e-mail]