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

[Toerless Eckert <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 11:08:38PM +0000, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
> 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.

;-)

But my example was just one of sub-ideal execution, which IMHO we can fix. After
all, we may be network professionals, but not meeting management professionals,
so no issue in us "learning by doing".  Go to other SDOs, and the
group "chairs" could be full-time paid "meeting professionals". And i am sure
in general we're doing darn well in comparison.

In general i think we want to have an environment that allows the best technical results
(RFCs) from the broadest set of participants. I don't think we can achieve this goal
without some compromise between local and remote experiences.

The microphone line IMHO should be easy to improve on.

The fact that meetecho made it so much easier than jabber in before to chat during
the meeting - and then have 30% of those chats be useful - that is a much bigger
issue. Especially because of the 30% usefulness. My suggestion is always to ask
chat folks to add the 30% themselves to the notes.ietf.org page for the meeting.

Aka: If we continue to swap good experiences and proliferate them, things will improve ;-)

Cheers
    Toerless

> 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]

-- 
---
[e-mail]