Thanks to those that sent emails or called and visited with me about the upcoming March Plenary and the potential logistics for remote participation.
The logistics for providing the remote participation for our meeting is being reviewed.
A possible call to discuss with the Executive Committee the issues with providing this service may be called later next week.
However, let me start the enumeration of the problems with providing the remote access.
1. Quality - the remote participant may not hear all that is going on.
2. Quality - the group may not be able to understand the remote person -
3. Quality - the more remote participants, the less likely either the remote or local group can understand the speaker.
Efficiency - with a remote person not able to hear, repeating the
statements, or the constant "I cannot hear" would be disruptive.
5. Efficiency - the ability to conduct meetings would be hindered - (just changing from VGA to HDMI caused several complaints)
6. Resources - we would need about 15 WebEx Licenses, (we have 8 conference licenses 4 Webex, 1 Zoom, 3 Join.me).
7. Resources - we have a 150Mb pipe, we usually consume it without any audio.
8. Resources - we do not have sound systems in all rooms
9. Policy enforcement - We do not allow recordings of our meetings - with an audio out, we would not be able to ensure it.
10. Policy - we do not permit voting by proxy or by persons not present.
Things that we can do to help mitigate the inconvenience of those not able to travel:
1. Submissions: Request that submissions are posted prior to start of meeting
2. Response: Use the Reflector to conduct discussion leading up to the plenary Session to engage all interested.
Response: Post midweek summaries of the meeting to keep all informed of the status of the meeting.
4. Policy: Excuse the attendance for those that otherwise would be present
(although missing one meeting should not normally cause voting rights
I am sorry that we do not have an ideal solution.
A phone call is scheduled for February 10, 2020 at 1pm ET
P.S. Collection of thoughts and other data:
From Geoff -
I've been thinking about what we should do about March participation for those whose travel plans have been affected by the coronavirus quarantines and other travel restrictions regarding coronavirus.
My conclusion is that we should do very little but communicate what we are doing a lot.
Two underlying principles are relevant here:
- Our membership rules don't require attendance at each Plenary.
- All our voting on drafts are by mail ballot
we do at meetings is more socialization and moving things forward than
detail decisions. Therefore, I believe that we could have a more or
less normal meeting with some additional sensitivity regarding those not
present (both in terms of numbers and major contributors). Therefore I
would suggest the following measures:
enforcement of advance posting requirements for presentations plus
perhaps bumping the schedule up a day or two (perhaps the preceding
- Appointment of
a proxy spokesman per TF who would be responsible for presenting mailed
in comments on any presentation to the TF.
of "special orders" that would allow major motions from the meeting to
be taken by a 7 day e-mail ballot the week following the Plenary.
- Number 3 above would only take place as a result of a procedural motion on the floor of the meeting.
is only a rough cut and first thoughts. Feel free to tweak. The
basic principle that I want to put forth is the minimalist approach that
still does something for those who are willing to actively put some
time into studying the presentations if they can't come. That roughly
approximates what they would do if they were actually at the meeting but
(a) doesn't give them attendance credit and (b0 doesn't cost us
anything other than the lost attendance fee.
I expect to participate in the phone call.
Best regards to all,
Access to which meetings
Do remote have full rights (i.e., their attendance counts, they can vote, etc.)
How do we do it technically?
Audio/video setup contracted to hotel AV provider
- Best effort using join.me and/or webex on presenter’s laptop
I suggest 1c, 2c, 3b
How many are affected?
As of today only 17 people indicate they are from China out of 476 as of Feb 07, 2020.
gives the following chart: