- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 11:22:50 +0000
- To: public-rif-wg@w3.org
1) a moan and 2) constructive suggestions? ==== I found scribing yesterday's meeting the hardest telecon I have ever scribed for. Basically the problem was that the group is big. The key consequence was that it was harder to know who was speaking at any one time. It also meant that administrivia was harder (e.g. roll call, having some confidence that the roll call in the minutes is correct, given people's comings and goings). I wonder if the sound quality ends up as worse ... although most people were muted most of the time. I sometimes found it difficult to hear. Also 90 mins is a long meeting, and I was unhappy with any extension really, simply because I was tired of scribing. ==== I wonder whether any of the following might be helpful: - allocate a second scribe to each meeting. The role of the second scribe could be: (a) to help clarify who spoke (b) to add additional stuff to the IRC when the main scribe is having difficulty. Of course, this role is often informally filled by participants in the telecon, but I wonder if formally allocating this role each meeting might help. The main scribe would still need to produce the minutes, which can be as big a task as scribing - don't overrun, unless we really, really have to. It is possible to end a meeting half way through an agenda. - all participants should check the scribe notes on things they say real time, and clarify if needed. - do not use any nicknames on IRC but full names (both Zakim IDs and IRC, e.g. JeremyCarroll not jeremy or jjc) - the first and every fifth or so time that anyone speaks, they say their name (Benjamin was good at this) ==== Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 21 December 2005 11:37:48 UTC