It seems to me that the fundamental problem is that most of the
meeting
has not read most of the drafts let alone the latest version under
discussion.
There is a fundamental IETF tenet that nothing is explained but there
is a false assumption
that the people in the meetings have read the drafts. Whenever I've
seen the chair ask how many hve read
the draft, it is usually < 5%. I think this is a key issue but the
solution is not obvious. Nobody can
read the number of drafts that are issued for a meeting. Not even for
the subset of attended WGs.
Other organizations have proponents explain what they are proposing.
IMO this leads to a better quality of discussion.
But this limits the number of topics that can be worked on in a week
to far less than the IETF tries to cover.
Steve Silverman
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf_censored-admin(_at_)vesuvio(_dot_)ipv6(_dot_)tilab(_dot_)com
[mailto:ietf_censored-admin(_at_)vesuvio(_dot_)ipv6(_dot_)tilab(_dot_)com]On
Behalf Of Margaret
Wasserman
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 10:10 AM
To: Dave Crocker
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: improving WG operation
People can and do use powerpoint slides in many ways.
Some folks will rework
text in real-time, based on interaction with the
participants. Some folks
just talk their slides rather than actually engaging with
the participants.
A thing to keep in mind is that slides and the jabber
activity can be
incredibly helpful to folks for whom English not their
native language.
I think that, in fact, the issue is not
powerpoint-vs-no-powerpoint. I think
it is exactly and only the concern you raise: meetings
need to be for working
group interaction. If that is the clear goal and if the
meeting is run with
that goal enforced, then none of the trappings matter.
I completely agree with this. And, I've been to plenty of
non-interactive lectures that didn't involve any slides.
Dave, do you have any thoughts about how we can change the IETF
culture from presentation to interaction (with or without slides).
This is something that the IESG has been talking about,
among others,
but I'm not sure that we've come up with any really
concrete ways to
provoke/encourage this change.
Margaret
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
This message was passed through
ietf_censored(_at_)carmen(_dot_)ipv6(_dot_)cselt(_dot_)it, which is a sublist
of
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org(_dot_) Not all messages are passed. Decisions on
what to pass are made solely by IETF_CENSORED ML
Administrator (ietf_admin(_at_)ngnet(_dot_)it).
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf