+1... especially wrt the "two weeks" part and Paul's explanation of why. john --On Thursday, July 30, 2020 13:46 -0400 Paul Wouters <paul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jul 2020, Nico Williams wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 10:45:27AM -0400, Kathleen Moriarty >> wrote: >>> I've just had other obligations, although the one time I was >>> on it was great. It may be useful to have regular meetup >>> times where people know to go and chat throughout the year. >>> Maybe weekly and targeted at time zone convenient/changing >>> times. >> >> +1 > > That could work. > >> Also, maybe we need scheduled hallway meetups during other >> weeks as well, because if one's TZ offset to the meeting's is >> large enough, it's just too difficult to spare 10 hours a day >> to the meeting and hallway meetings. > > For me, I noticed that after my early morning start and having > a few > meetings behind my laptop, I just need to have a break and > leave my > house, catch some sun and a coffee. So that means I'm not > available in > the "coffee time slots". I can't see myself doing 3h of > meetings, 30 > minutes of "still behind my laptop chatting with people", > followed by > 3h of meetings. > >> When I've attended physical meetings, the workday goes from >> 8AM or so (breakfast, 9AM meetings) to around 11PM or >> midnight even (dinner, "dinner BoFs", "bar BoFs", hallway >> meetings, catching up with $WORK, etc.). That's a 16 hour >> day considering that even just social events (eg lunch) >> generally involve work in some fashion. There's no way to do >> 10 of 16 hours on an 8 hour TZ phase difference. > > Even without the timezone change, those hallways and > lunch/coffee > meetings are still you taking a break from sitting in a chair > behind > your laptop. And gather.town does not offer me that. > >> We might want to consider spreadign remote-only meetings over >> two weeks instead of one. > > Please don't :) > I can mark a week as "IETF week" and my collegues know I'm > mostly > gone/busy, but extending that to two weeks would not work. It > would > result in me not being able to drop most non-IETF work, and it > would > be harder for me to be seen as "busy at IETF". So regular work > would > interfere and expect precedence over my IETF meetings. > > Paul >
