> On Apr 17, 2020, at 4:28 PM, Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > But we don't need presentation times. They have always been a huge waste of f2f meeting time. Now that we're not likely to be meeting f2f for another year or two, is a good time to get rid of them. Even when we go back to meeting f2f, prepare the presentations in advance and let us view them before we show up at the meeting. For that matter, skip the presentation entirely (it's much faster to read than to listen to speech) and just post the slides (which are, admittedly, sometimes easier to digest than the I-Ds). Add comments to the slides if it helps. > > Keith I'd like to disagree here (regarding presentations at F2F meetings). Presenting work can be an important part of WG mechanics. LSR (IS-IS/OSPF) will have a smallish group of experts reading the drafts and their revisions. A much larger group of experts including ones with cross-wg/cross-area expertise will sit through a short presentation at a F2F meeting and sometimes provide valuable feedback. I appreciate those extra sets of eyes. Also, human nature being what it is, sometimes you have work that a WG doesn't like (or won't like), but the emails just don't seem to be getting that across. Having a mic line of actual human beings, having been seen to listen to the speaker, and then telling them directly, in person, why the proposal is not a good idea with the allowance of immediate interaction, can be the difference between ending a debate cleanly and protracted never ending email threads, upset authors, appeals, etc. This won't work near as well if you just have people walk up (no presentation) and tell the author they are wrong, as you miss out on the "these people listened to me" part then. Thanks, Chris.
