On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 5:09 PM John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > --On Wednesday, April 22, 2020 11:44 -0700 > ned+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > >> Well, neither did the paper blue sheets provide any > >> verification. > > > > And all it took was a functioning writing tool to operate it. > > I can't get this to work in Brave, so I'm not signing the > > sheet for the sessions > > I attend. > > This suggests something else that may be relevant. If there is > _any_ chance that we might want to use session attendance > information for IETF 107 for anything at all, including but > definitely not limited to Nomcom eligibility in the future (not > this year's NomCom), it would probably be wise to either merge > to information from the Etherpad with Jabber logins and/or to > explicit ask people who were unable (or sufficiently > inconvenienced by technology) to record their presence on the > Etherpad to identify themselves to the Secretariat in some > appropriate way (I hope not on this mailing list). Having participate in many of the virtuals, it is very common for there to be many more names in the WebEx than in the Etherpad bluesheet -- I've often heard "We have 39 names in WebEx and 25 in Etherpad"; some of this is caused by 1: people joining WebEx from multiple devices, 2: people having difficulty accessing Etherpad and, sadly, 3: some of it is people not bothering... I'm much more concerned about #2 than #3 (and #1 isn't an issue), but there is a delta... W > > Jay, is that feasible? > > thanks, > john > > -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf
