On 6/22/21 5:33 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 6/22/21 4:59 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Hi Shuah,
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 04:33:22PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 6/18/21 7:46 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 01:55:23PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 6/10/21 1:26 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 21:39:49 +0300 Laurent Pinchart wrote:
There will always be more informal discussions between on-site
participants. After all, this is one of the benefits of
conferences, by
being all together we can easily organize ad-hoc discussions.
This is
traditionally done by finding a not too noisy corner in the
conference
center, would it be useful to have more break-out rooms with A/V
equipment than usual ?
I've been giving this quite some thought too, and I've come to the
understanding (and sure I can be wrong, but I don't think that I am),
is that when doing a hybrid event, the remote people will always be
"second class citizens" with respect to the communication that is
going
on. Saying that we can make it the same is not going to happen unless
you start restricting what people can do that are present, and that
will just destroy the conference IMO.
That said, I think we should add more to make the communication
better
for those that are not present. Maybe an idea is to have break outs
followed by the presentation and evening events that include remote
attendees to discuss with those that are there about what they might
have missed. Have incentives at these break outs (free stacks and
beer?) to encourage the live attendees to attend and have a
discussion
with the remote attendees.
The presentations would have remote access, where remote attendees
can
at the very least write in some chat their questions or comments. If
video and connectivity is good enough, perhaps have a screen where
they
can show up and talk, but that may have logistical limitations.
You are absolutely right that the remote people will have a hard time
participating and keeping up with in-person participants. I have a
couple of ideas on how we might be able to improve remote experience
without restricting in-person experience.
- Have one or two moderators per session to watch chat and Q&A to
enable
remote participants to chime in and participate.
- Moderators can make sure remote participation doesn't go
unnoticed and
enable taking turns for remote vs. people participating in
person.
It will be change in the way we interact in all in-person sessions for
sure, however it might enhance the experience for remote attendees.
A moderator to watch online chat and relay questions is I believe very
good for presentations, it's hard for a presenter to keep an eye on a
screen while having to manage the interaction with the audience in the
room (there's the usual joke of the difference between an introvert and
an extrovert open-source developer is that the extrovert looks at
*your*
shoes when talking to you, but in many presentations the speaker
nowadays does a fairly good job as watching the audience, at least from
time to time :-)).
For workshop or brainstorming types of sessions, the highest barrier to
participation for remote attendees is local attendees not speaking in
microphones. That's the number one rule that moderators would need to
enforce, I think all the rest depends on it. This may require a larger
number of microphones in the room than usual.
Absolutely. Moderator has to make sure the following things happen for
this to be effective:
- Watch chat and Q&A, Raise hand from remote participants
- Enforce some kind of taking turns to allow fairness in
participation
- Have the speaker repeat questions asked in the room (we do that now
in some talks - both remote and in-person - chat and Q&A needs
reading out for recording)
- Explore live Transcription features available in the virtual conf.
platform. You still need humans watching the transcription.
- Have a running session notes combined with transcription.
Any of these options aren't sustainable when large number of people
are participating remotely or in-person. In general a small number of
people participate either in person or remote in any case, based on
my observation in remote and in-person settings.
Maybe we can experiment with one or two workshops this time around
and see how it works out. If we can figure an effective way, it would
be beneficial for people that can't travel for one reason or the
other.
Can we nominate moderators ahead of time ? For workshop-style
discussions, they need to be a person who won't participate actively in
the discussions, as it's impossible to both contribute and moderate at
the same time.
Correct. It will be impossible to participate and moderate in workshop
setting. We have to ask for volunteers and nominate moderators ahead of
time.
Subsystems could seek volunteers from other subsystems perhaps ...
thanks,
-- Shuah
