Re: combine IRC channels?

I thought we had sorted all this out in the meeting.
I don't think tantek was saying in favor of all in one. I'm pretty sure he
was saying, there was a previous resolution to combine the channels that
met with trouble for meetings and minutes.  So that resolution still
stands.  It is fine for the IG to join the channel.   Since there was a
problem with technology for meeting minutes, just do meeting minutes in
#socialIG, and come on over in to #social.

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Bassetti, Ann <ann.bassetti@boeing.com>
wrote:

>  We need to come to consensus on which IRC channel the IG will use for
> meetings. There have been conflicting opinions.
>
>
>
> Personally, I'm fine with using either #social or #socialig for meeting
> minutes. I think I slightly favor hanging out in #social .... but scribing
> the IG minutes in #socialig.  Seems a bit "cleaner" to me.
>
>
>
> But I don't really care. Tantek spoke for all in #social; Owen speaks here
> for #socialig for minutes; ... others?  Maybe we'll have to discuss this
> again in the WG meeting next week?
>
>
>
>   -- Ann
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Owen Shepherd [mailto:owen.shepherd@e43.eu]
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 04, 2015 10:03 AM
> *To:* Dave Wilkinson; Bassetti, Ann
> *Cc:* public-socialweb@w3.org; public-social-interest@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: combine IRC channels?
>
>
>
> This is something I like in general - the IG and WG are really working on
> the same thing, and it'd be good to increase the communication between us.
> I'm also in favor of continuing to use #socialig for meetings, however, as
> it seems that SocialWG discussions have a tendency to spill over into IG
> meeting periods (as was demonstrated during the last IG meeting, for
> example)
>
>
>
> - Owen
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 5:55 PM Dave Wilkinson <wilkie@xomb.org> wrote:
>
>  I think this is a great idea! Almost obviously so. The room should be
> more #social, after all. :)
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Bassetti, Ann <ann.bassetti@boeing.com>
> wrote:
>
>  Hello Social WG Folks –
>
>
>
> QUESTION:  The Social IG would like to know if it would be OK to combine
> the IRC channels.  IOW, instead of having both #social and #socialig, we
> would all use #social.  I brought this up in IRC last week: (
> http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/2015-05-29 ).
>
>
>
> In general, except for scribing during meetings, the #socialig channel is
> very quiet. Thus we thought it would be good synergy to use the same
> channel.
>
>
>
> ISSUE:  might be if WG folks want to discuss something during the 1 hour
> IG call (Wednesdays; 15:00 UTC) – then there would be chatter in channel
> unrelated to the meeting being scribed, or people would have to wait, or
> open a new channel.
>
>
>
> ALTERNATIVE:  would be for us to use the #socialig channel ONLY for
> scribing meetings, but hang out in #social for normal day-to-day chat.
>
>
>
> As you'll see in the log (link, above), @cwebber2 and @aaronpk both
> thought it would be OK. Although with a question about the
> chat-during-meeting that I raise above. I think I prefer the "alternative",
> wherein we use #socialig only for meetings. What do the rest of you think?
>
>
>
> This question / suggestion is part of the item elf added to today's WG
> agenda (https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-06-02#Coordination_with_IG
> ).
>
>
>
> Thanks – Ann, for the IG
>
>
>
>