-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
The sessions where floating mikes worked well were smaller in size,
attendance wise. In fact, most of the time, the main reason for using
the floating mikes was *not* so that everyone in the *room* could hear
what was being said, but instead so that people listening in on the
*audio stream* could hear what was being said.
In larger rooms, the dynamics are much different, and floating mikes
would not work as well.
Tony Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
James M. Polk wrote:
>
> floating mics are a bad idea for many reasons - each getting worse with
> room and or audience size increasing.
>
> Who is in charge of who's next to speak?
> Who passes the mics to the folks in the middle of a row who didn't
> bother to get up?
> Turning of heads happens now to know places (mics in the aisles), but
> because seated persons are not standing, they cannot be easily seen,
> causing some confusion and general discomfort in the audience to "find
> the person", then "find their face" to know who's saying what - which is
> important sometimes.
>
> Few people talk during sessions, and those that do, know to sit where
> they can readily get to a mic to make a point. I see nothing wrong with
> keeping this layout
>
>> Participants are more than capable of turning their heads
>> but when holding a technical discussion those extra mics make a
>> significant difference.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFDBLOdxsSylYhzrRYRAqPWAKC++Dj/Eh55CgL36ppw/hUiBy2gmACfbZKj
0H065ZkT23fJfq58v2jRiIA=
=HW0c
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
