Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off | From | Shuah Khan <> | Date | Tue, 22 Jun 2021 17:57:11 -0600 |
| |
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
| |