On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 05:35:44PM +0200,
john(_dot_)loughney(_at_)kolumbus(_dot_)fi wrote:
That question stymied me, so I just selected "No change."
I thought that was clear.
My problem is what "herring bone" seating layout is. I don't understand
why the question is asked either. Why is it important whether people
attended those sessions?
Stig
John
-- original message --
Subject: Re: IETF 63 On-line Survey
From: Jari Arkko <jari(_dot_)arkko(_at_)piuha(_dot_)net>
Date: 08/17/2005 3:26 pm
Spencer Dawkins wrote:
Would you prefer longer meetings or shorter meetings?
Shorter meetings with more overlaps
No change
Longer meetings with fewer overlaps
means! I'm answering it, assuming that it refers to the one-hour
sessions that sometimes get doubled-up into two-hour sessions, but if
you mean something else, please let us know.
I interpreted it as having a short IETF meeting (e.g. mon-thu) but with lots
of parallel WG meetings vs. longer IETF meeting (e.g. sun-fri) but with less
parallel WG meetings.
So I guess that just shows how people have a different understanding
of what was being asked.
--Jari
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf