Hi Michael, > On Apr 10, 2019, at 6:54 PM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Alissa Cooper <alissa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> We actually had that in the graph the secretariat originally produced, >> but took it out for the plenary slide since I didn’t want to overload >> people with information for a slide that wasn’t going to be on the >> screen very long. You can see it here: >> https://datastudio.google.com/reporting/ >> 1QceS5g7XvELBUObRDIApjxjZg2a08plH/page/YHqZ?s=veSmL7Dy01g > > I looked at the slide, and I noticed that the nomcom-eligible line seems to > go up and down in sync with the new attendees line. I'd think if there is > any relationship there should be a delay of 3-5 meetings. So I'm wondering > if I am reading the graph correctly. Both first-time and nomcom-eligible correlate somewhat with the total attendees. That is, a meeting with fewer total attendees also tends to have fewer attendees who have been to 3 out of 5. > > Does the datastudio permit people to run what-if scenarios without violating > the privacy of the data source? Does it match people who remote attended > with their in-person attendance? > > I'd specifically like to run some nomcom-remain-eligible scenarios. No, this is not possible with the datastudio data. You can right-click the chart to download the data, but it is provided in the aggregate. Alissa > > -- > Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandelman Software Works > -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- > > >
