also sprach Maximiliano Curia <m...@debian.org> [2015-06-19 13:16 +0200]: > But there's an important part of video setup that would be lost in > that case, as for the BoFs, having a video setup would provide > a way for remote viewers to participate in the discussion, using > irc to relay their comments. > > And, even though the BoFs per se might have a small audience, the > results of such a meeting can be invaluable to Debian, and so, > it's currently quite a hard decision for the content team that has > to choose among the BoFs, which ones are going to have video and > allow remote participation.
Don't we have a way to query the BoF organisers whether video is wanted, which is information useful to room allocation? In the majority of BoFs I attended in the previous years (and especially at DC14, when this was toplicalised), we didn't want to have video coverage, and if it was provided, then either the remote participants were ignored (false expectations), or (a lot of) time was lost with tech and the bi-modal interaction, which essentially forces you to pace yourself with the slower medium, at which point we might just as well stick with IRC meetings. This might also be an argument for why maybe Amsterdam should maybe *not* have video coverage (too many people, too hard to synchronise it all with IRC, also more people available to carry out the word and share information with those not present) and instead we should offer video coverage in one or two of the small rooms (statistically more likely to host teams with some key people remotely participating). I think the idea of teleconferencing is interesting. Although teleconferencing also has significant impacts on the meeting, it's still vastly better than video+IRC. It'd be great if we found people who'd want to experiment with this at DC15. The problem with unmanned video I see is that it'll shave time off the meeting while people fiddle with the tech, it might well be qualitatively crap, and it still needs to be post-processed anyway to be useful, unless we just stream it without archiving. But then I think teleconferencing would be the better approach. In any case, all of the above already depends on the capacities of the video team, and we should also make it optional to each BoF organiser anyway. If the concern is to not exclude remote contributors and create resourceful material during these BoFs, then one alternative is always for the organiser to ensure someone will write proper minutes and share them with the team later on. Those might take a lot longer to prepare than switching on a video camera, but they're going to be more useful later on (indexing, faster reading than watching, etc.). Most conferences I am involved with actually appoint minute keepers to events who are the responsible to create short writeups about everything that happened. IMHO, someone writing good documentation about events during DC15 could be considered as such during a future DC sponsorship decision. -- .''`. martin f. krafft <madd...@debconf.org> @martinkrafft : :' : DebConf orga team `. `'` `- DebConf15: Heidelberg, Germany: http://debconf15.debconf.org DebConf16: Cape Town: https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf16
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)
_______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
