| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
George, I agree we should keep face-to-face meetings. You bring up an interesting point about voting rights. I can imagine if a person can get/maintain voting right without attending F2F meetings their sponsor (company) may not even support them going to meetings, claiming
they can fully participate within going to F2F meetings. So even if the person wants to attend the F2F meeting they may not have the financial support to attend. My preference is still,
Regards, Steve From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** <STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org>
On Behalf Of George Zimmerman I think Geoff makes an excellent point, one which I was discussing with a friend the other day when he was describing business meetings going back and forth between in-person and online. Familiarity is an enabler for effective on-line
meetings. It builds empathy and understanding, which are vital to the consensus process. (or any agreement process). With small groups (<10), some personal ‘check-in’ or ‘chit-chat’ time often helps to build familiarity online, but that doesn’t scale well. For the most part, to the new participant, online meetings are kind of like cold sales calls. I don’t think I’ve seen an effective model yet for building that familiarity with an extended sequence of online-only meetings. So either we’d
have to invent one (which I think is a bit of social science outside our primary expertise) or we need to weave personal interaction into the future meeting discussion. For me, I think this means at least a couple face-to-face meetings per year, with participation/membership/voting
rights heavily weighted to encourage attendance. -george From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** <STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org>
On Behalf Of Geoff Thompson Colleagues- The one topic I don't see on the list here that is significantly different between the short term problem and long term meeting remotely is that in addressing the short term problem,
we had a situation where we all knew each other. It is much easier to function in a remote meeting when it is between people who know each other. When we went remote we had a lot of new folks attending because it was free and didn't require travel or huge blocks of time to do that. I don't think we got a lot of new contributors
or even critics during the process. If we wish to continue remote or mixed on a long term basis we need to figure out how new blood will be able to worm their way into our process. Geoff On Tuesday, November 30, 2021, 08:23:23 AM PST, Paul Nikolich <paul.nikolich@att.net> wrote:
Dear EC Members, Please respond to Andrew's below request, as your observations are important input to the IEEE 802 Future Meeting ad hoc. If you don't have time to respond, please
delegate it to an appropriate WG/TAG member. Thank you and regards, --Paul ------ Original Message ------ From: "Andrew Myles (amyles)" <00000b706269bb8b-dmarc-request@listserv.ieee.org> Sent: 11/26/2021 12:30:06 AM Subject: [802SEC] More on IEEE 802 Future meeting ad hoc
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-SEC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-SEC&A=1 |