Re: Assessment criteria for decision on in-person/virtual IETF 108

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 20/04/2020, at 8:15 AM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 20-Apr-20 08:00, Joel M. Halpern wrote:

Note that if they had simply said "we know the July meeting will be
remote", a (presumably different) set of people would have complained
about "how did you decide that?"

Correct. However, a doodle poll sent to recent attendees with three options:

Will you travel to IETF108 if the meeting is on? Yes/Maybe/No

might be revealing.

I doubt it very much because the response is not meaningful data.   Even if the options were Yes/Probably Yes/Don’t know/Probably No/No then people can still only answer for how they feel about it today and not their actual intentions in July.  I imagine that just about everyone will say Probably No/Maybe and as we get closer that decision will firm up into a Yes or No, meaning that we need to run the same poll weekly and by the time that has firmed up we will have left it too late to plan properly. 

Also it doesn’t help at all with the mixed case where say 60% say Yes and 40% say No - as the IESG explained for 107, we can’t just decide on the viability of a meeting on absolute numbers because it depends on how that translates into individual working groups and their viability.

Jay


Regards
  Brian


-- 
Jay Daley
IETF Executive Director
jay@xxxxxxxx


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux