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. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart
