On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 8:44 PM, Janet P Gunn <jgu...@csc.com> wrote: > As someone who has done it both ways (in person and remotely) I have a > couple of comments. > > Having the slides available early is an advantage to BOTH in-person and > remote participants. > > As a remote participant I "need" the slides available about 30 min before > the session. > As a participant (in-person or remote) it is VERY helpful to have the slides > available much earlier. > So I do not think "how many remote participants for this session" is a > useful parameter for "how important is it to get the slides out early"
Agreed. What I meant was it strengthens the case to make slides available before hand. > On the other hand, I DO think that the number of remote participants for a > particular session IS a useful parameter for "how important is it to have an > active jabber scribe" and "how important is it to make sure the audio > streaming is working well." Agreed. Again, it strengthens the case to get it done right. This part has been working well though. > As a remote participant the list of "working groups I am interested in" is > different from the list of "working groups I plan to participate in > remotely". > There is a SMALL list of working groups I am willing to get up at 2:30 AM > (my time) to participate in (otherwise I MIGHT look at the slides and read > the minutes when they come out) > There is a much LARGER list of working groups I will participate in > remotely if they are in (my time) "normal working hours". Agreed. there are a couple of nuances here. There is a list of groups I would wake up in the middle of the night so that I can follow the discussion realtime. The other is a list of groups for which I would like to have meetecho recording so that I can follow more closely later. > There is nothing you can do about this a priori, but if the records show > that, for instance - whenever IETF is in North America, WG abc consistently > has a large number of remote participants from Europe, and WG xyz > consistently has a large number of remote participants from Asia - that > could be factored into the agenda scheduling process. Yes exactly. Great point. I forgot to mention this. Right now we cannot see patterns as we do not have enough data. Just moving around the WG scheduling can help a lot more people participate. > In-person participants are not asked to list the WG they are interested in. > That is accomplished by the blue sheets. I wonder if there is a way to do > something analogous to the blue sheets for remote participants, whether > through jabber, email, doodle-poll, wiki, whatever. Yeah. I had in mind something like doodle. Simple, lightweight works and gets data. Also we can start this on a WG-by-WG groups though an IETF wide tool would be useful. > I agree with your points 2 and 3. > > Janet
