f2f and mailing list participation - a question for "newer" participants

(The topic seems to have wandered enough to warrant a change of
subject, and apologies for extending what has become a frequently
replayed thread but I've a question at the end aimed at some folks
who maybe don't post here so much...)

On 19/04/16 19:43, Melinda Shore wrote:
> At any rate, inability to travel to Berlin should not in
> any way be seen as a barrier to participation.
I don't think we ought pretend that mailing list participation
isn't inevitably enhanced via in-person connections.

Yes, we can participate via mailing lists. And we need to do
better in encouraging folks to do that. And we need to do that
over and over so that newer and older participants really get it.

But having been to a few f2f meetings IMO really does make
it far easier to get stuff done via mailing lists and otherwise,
e.g. on jabber or audio calls. I further figure that's not
down to how the IETF works, but is because we're talking about
humans.

So I can fully understand how folks who've not (yet:-) been
participating for that long would find attending a f2f meeting
makes a HUGE difference to them.

I can also see how the same sets of folks might have different
views on our current remote access setup - when I had to be
remote for a meeting (Hawaii) I really found it much better than
I had expected, really only the TZ was a killer. But, and it's
a big BUT, I recognised loads of voices in audio and could
IM people in the room to ask stuff, so I suspect the experience
is nowhere near as satisfactory for newer participants.

So, I'd be really interested in hearing from people who've
been participating a bit for a while and who'd consider themselves
as "newer participants" (define that yourself however you want)...

If you've been to a f2f meeting what difference did that make
to how you participate via mailing lists and remote tools?

or

If you've not been to a f2f meeting, what's your experience of
participation via mailing lists and (especially) remote tools?

Cheers,
S.

PS: If folks prefer to answer offlist feel free to do that and
I'll summarise back to the list with whatever level of nymity
you say you want.

PPS: This isn't meant to be scientific nor a good survey, I'm
just interested:-) If there's some or no reaction that might
help with some proper survey stuff in future.

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature