The question of tools and techniques for taking/organizing minutes
should perhaps be considered separately.
I made one experimental try at Etherpad that didn't go well. And we had
a notes taker in CLUE try it, which also went badly. I don't consider
that definitive - maybe we just needed a better version/deployment
and/or better advanced practice.
But Etherpad doesn't currently fit well with my working techniques for
notes taking. I always found it hard to keep up when taking notes - I
would want to capture who was presenting (if I didn't already know) and
the doc they were discussing, but often couldn't get it off the first
slide before they moved on. So for a few years now I have been preparing
a notes template before hand for each meeting, with extracts from the
agenda for each session I intend to attend. That way I only need to add
to that with points made or blow by blow.
If that was viewed as a generally useful technique then etherpad could
be pre-primed in every session. But if not it would be inconvenient to
do on the fly.
The other thing is that when taking notes I often write some
observations that are for me, but that I wouldn't want to share with the
world. If I'm official scribe then I extract my notes for the session
and "sanitize" them before sending on. If I were using etherpad I would
be inhibited from capturing those private observations for myself.
Thanks,
Paul
On 5/22/12 11:04 AM, Brian Rosen wrote:
I've recently been converted to using Etherpad for minutes (I usually volunteer
to be note taker for 2-3 sessions at a meeting). It's a very nice tool for the
job.
Any jabber user can login to the Etherpad to see the minutes taking shape as I
type them. That way, they have them if they want them, and don't if they don't.
I personally think the minutes are not a good feed for jabber in the abstract.
The goals of a jabber scribe are not the same as the goals of the minute taker.
My ability to take minutes would be seriously compromised by doing it in
jabber because of editing. I edit as I go, and I'm done when the meeting is
over.
Brian
On May 22, 2012, at 10:47 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 8:59 AM, John Leslie<j...@jlc.net> wrote:
(directed to<vmeet> only:)
Peter Saint-Andre<stpe...@stpeter.im> wrote:
On 3/29/12 2:50 AM, George, Wes wrote:
... On Behalf Of Melinda Shore
I've put up a first crack at a how-to-do-remote-good page, here:
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/group/wgchairs/wiki/RemoteParticipation.
I made a few changes in the wiki page...
This is a very helpful page. I made a few tweaks, but not much was needed.
It's a very helpful page for remote-attendance. :^)
It's, alas, not up to the task for remote _participation_. :^(
"Typically 5-15 seconds" isn't good enough. (I'm not arguing whether
_one_ second is even "good enough".)
The delay needs to be known. Adjusting to a five-second delay is one
thing; adjusting to a 30-second delay (which is too-often seen) is quite
another. Adjusting to an unknown delay is no longer "participation".
When asking whether the remote audio is OK, _measure_ the delay.
The part about one person being both jabber-scribe and minute-taker
needs to be "Don't do this!"
First, please note that some WG are "jabber-active" and others are
not. In other words, some consistently have many participants on
jabber, and others consistently do not.
I really like to take minutes on jabber, as (at least for the
jabber-active WG). Two pro's :
- the jabber logs are saved, so even if my laptop dies, the log does not.
- In a jabber active WG, the inevitable ellipses will be filled in by
other participants.
Two con's :
- If the local WAN goes down, so does the jabber log. (And, this does happen.)
- It can drown out the other jabber chat by other participants.
I have suggested a number of times that there be 2 jabber chats for
each WG meeting, one for discussions, one for
minute taking, but without any traction so far.
Regards
Marshall
If remote participation is important, minutes need to happen separately.
To some degree, minutes can be pieced together after the fact, provided
there is a separate backup audio recording.
The Jabber Scribe needs full-time access to a microphone. Arguably the
Jabber Scribe should be sitting next to the meeting Chair.
Mentioning the issue of adjusting for the audio delay when recognizing
remote participation is good -- but there needs to be a practical way of
accomplishing this. Sitting next to the meeting Chair and mentioning
who wants to be channeled seems plausible...
Projecting the jabber stream probably isn't a great idea for the general
case (there will certainly be exceptional cases). Advising the in-room
participants to use the jabber room is always good, though.
The part about clarifying the name of each speaker at the microphones
is a start, but again there needs to be a practical way...
In practice, what I find works best is "Who's talking" questions in
jabber, followed by "Please state your name for the minutes" if nobody
answers in jabber. (Of course, this coming 30 seconds _after_ the person
mumbled his/her name _is_ disruptive, but IMHO it's important enough to
justify the disruption.)
It's asking _a_lot_ of the Jabber Scribe to note the name of every
person who speaks, but possibly the Jabber Scribe could guess and add
a question-mark when s/he's at all uncertain. (If the Jabber Scribe
already has no idea whatsoever, asking on-mike is called-for IMHO.)
I suggest that the jabber stream SHOULD contain the name of every
participant speaking at the microphone (or channeled). In practice,
the Jabber Scribe can't simultaneously type and speak; so someone else
would probably need to add the "channeling NN" note.
<asbestos-suit = ON>
--
John Leslie<j...@jlc.net>
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html.
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vmeet
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html.
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vmeet
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html.
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vmeet
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html.
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vmeet
