Re: Requirement to go to meetings

For what it's worth, I've been a repeat-offender note-taker for a bunch of 
groups at the IETF, and was doing that when we mass-created all the 
jabber.ietf.org rooms.
It was obvious to me at that time (but I was wrong) that I should be 
continuing to take notes in the jabber room, so people had the chance to 
correct things I wasn't getting right, but the volume of my notes swamped 
the ability of anyone else to use the jabber room for discussion, asking 
questions, raising hands ...
This was true for working group meetings, virtual interim meetings, the IESG 
telechats, and plenaries (so, across the board).
There were several IETFs where there were two jabber rooms (one for sessions 
I was note-taking for, and one for other uses) for RAI working groups I was 
note-taking for, but that happened two or three years ago, and I haven't 
seen any meetings with two jabber rooms lately.
Spencer

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Saint-Andre" <stpeter(_at_)stpeter(_dot_)im>
To: <kevin(_at_)kismith(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk>
Cc: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 10:57 AM
Subject: Re: Requirement to go to meetings


> On 10/24/11 6:44 AM, Kevin Smith wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 1:37 PM, Dave CROCKER <dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net> 
> > wrote:
> > > On 10/24/2011 4:09 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> > > > > It's really not that big a deal.  Make sure that audio is working,
> > > > > that there's a Jabber scribe/Jabber room watcher
> > > ...
> > > > I have a concrete suggestion for WG chairs: don't ask for a "Jabber
> > > > scribe" (which makes it sound as if the hapless volunteer needs to type
> > > > everything that's said into the chatroom) but instead ask for someone 
> > > > to
> > > > relay comments from the chatroom to the mic.
> > >
> > > Basic question:  what has been the claimed purpose for doing jabber
> > > scribing?
> > >
> > > I thought it was a means of produce raw minutes.  A side -- and 
> > > sometimes
> > > extremely valuable -- benefit is as a relatively real-time alternative
> > > source of information about what is being spoken; this can be quite 
> > > helpful
> > > for participants who are not native English speakers.
> > >
> > > If neither of these purposes are worth the effort, then your suggestion
> > > sounds dandy.  If either is sufficiently valuable, then my question is 
> > > why
> > > your groups haven't needed them.  (I'm expecting the answer to be that 
> > > your
> > > groups didn't feel the need; so my real question is why not?)
> > FWIW, I've found Jabber scribes supplementing the audio stream useful
> > because the audio stream alone isn't always sufficient to hear what's
> > going on, or to know who's speaking.
> Problem is, it's a lot of work to scribe the audio, and it's not easy to
> find volunteers for that task. I do think it's helpful for someone to at
> least relay the names of those who step up to the mic, but that could be
> done with those little RFID badges we experimented with a few times.
>
> Peter 
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf