> On Feb 2, 2017, at 8:20 PM, John Leslie <j...@jlc.net> wrote: > > Christian O'Flaherty <oflahe...@isoc.org> wrote: >> >> Before we start working on the documents I would try to decide what >> do we need, > > Hard to answer that before agreeing what we're trying to accomplish…
I guess we're trying to make the remote participation experience closer to the real WG meeting. >> We're now discussing how can we adapt those experiences to make them >> useful for a WG work. > > Hmm... I don't think there's a single answer to that question... > >> Do we need a more formal process when real work is done remotely? >> (do we need new 'roles' for the hubs (like a virtual chair), > > I doubt such a title would help much. > > But there's definitely a role for folks who are experienced in WG > meetings in-person. horrible example, I agree :-) >> should they be recognized/acknowledged/approved by the IETF) > > Sounds like more effort than it's worth… But we want to keep track of them. Could be as easy as a form to be filled and acknowledged by the WG chair. >> How can we make it equivalent to be an individual remote participant >> vs. part of a remote hub. > > We can’t. actually, we’re trying to improve remote participation so it’s not bad if it’s different. I wanted to address JohnK point: “do not do them at the expense of individual participation" >> And how are they different to interim [video] calls? > > Different issue… is it? What if there’s a WG session in the main IETF meeting where just lurkers are at the main session and the people doing most of the work are remote participants (in hubs or individuals). Isn’t it closer to an interim meeting? > >> a way forward could be to update the current documents making it clear >> it was an experiment to promote IETF participation and start a learning >> process on doing something more formal. > > I recommend against trying "more-formal" before we settle what we're > trying to accomplish. I agree on avoiding “more-formal” as much as possible but I thought we were clear on what we are trying to accomplish. > > Myself, I'd like to make remote-hubs more practical for folks already > familiar with on-site IETF weeks. I think that will help newcomers > as well as "oldcomers”. That’s right, although it will attract more newcomers from the regions of people already familiar with on-site IETF meetings. But I will support you by now… we should focus on this objective: "make remote-hubs more practical for folks already familiar with on-site IETF weeks" Christian > > -- > John Leslie <j...@jlc.net> Christian O'Flaherty oflahe...@isoc.org <mailto:oflahe...@isoc.org> Regional Development - Internet Society Skype/Gmail/Yahoo!: christian.oflaherty Mobile/WhatsApp: +598 98769636
_______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html. https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vmeet
