The problem is that many of the things that make a meeting better for remote people, make it worse for local people. You can see that even in IETF meetings today - the virtual interim meetings were everyone is remote is a much better experience for remote people than meetings where lots of people are local in one room and some of the people are remote. To make any serious progress on this, I suspect we will have to discuss the trade offs of how a WG best makes progress vs fairness to people that don't/can't come. Note that depending on if you think I should have used don't or can't come in the previous sentences already highly biases the question. On Oct 23, 2011, at 11:01 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > I'm not sure I'd blame chairs so much, but anyway... > > Here's a suggestion - create a list for people who are active > IETF participants but who miss a lot of meetings. (And ask people > who don't match that profile, like me, to stay out of the > discussion - we can read the archive if we're curious.) Let folks > on that list see if they can figure out things to do that they > think would make things better then bring that back here. > > I'm not claiming this'd "fix" the problem, but I'd be interested > in the output and it'd avoid most of the discussion about > remote attendee things being discussed by the usual suspects > who do in fact go to most meetings afaics. > > S. > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf