Re: [802SEC] Socials
Pat -
I agree.
It was a deliberate choice to place the architecture group meeting time
outside the "normal" meeting time, in order to ensure that the nominated
participants would be able to take part without distraction from the other
meeting activities.
Regards,
Tony
At 19:36 22/11/2004, Pat Thaler wrote:
>Bob,
>
>I agree. The result of moving the plenary to Sunday would be to have
>smaller attendence at it. We should make it as easy as possible for those
>who care to keep track of things across 802 to attend the plenary session.
>I also feel strongly that in the interest of openness we should keep the
>opening Exec on Monday morning. We already have moved the closing Exec to
>a time when many people have to stay one or two extra hotel nights if they
>wish to observe the it, we should keep at least one of the Exec meetings
>at a more accessible time.
>
>Also, the time Mat proposed would conflict with the Architecture activity
>which some Exec participates in and which it would not be practical to
>move during the week.
>
>Regards,
>Pat
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-stds-802-sec@listserv.ieee.org
>[mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@listserv.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Bob O'Hara
>Sent: Monday, 22 November, 2004 11:03 AM
>To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
>Subject: Re: [802SEC] Socials
>
>
>Mat,
>
>I am on the fence about the social. But I am quite convinced that the
>802 Plenary meeting is something that must not be moved "outside the
>weekly boundaries". I am also opposed to moving other EC functions. We
>should not be doing things that have the potential to make it more
>difficult for members of 802 to participate in the process. Moving the
>plenary to Sunday would have exactly this effect.
>
> -Bob
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-stds-802-sec@listserv.ieee.org
>[mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@listserv.ieee.org] On Behalf Of Sherman,
>Matthew J. (US SSA)
>Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 7:25 PM
>To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
>Subject: Re: [802SEC] Socials
>
>
>Folks,
>
>My intent was in fact to change the purpose from a Social to a Meet and
>Greet. We are no longer 600-800, we are 1600 strong. I'm don't think
>the social really plays the role it once did. In fact, I know many
>people who intentionally skip it. There are many ways to take a break.
>I'd say move the tutorial to the middle of the week and make sure we
>don't schedule work during that time. Then people still get a break,
>and we have more room for tutorials.
>
>The bottom line is that some groups seem to have problems cramming it
>all into one week. The bigger we get, the more activities there are,
>and the more difficult to get all the actual work done. What I am
>proposing is to move the less critical functions outside of the weekly
>boundaries. To me, this includes the function of the plenary meeting,
>and the social.
>
>In addition I'm trying to move the EC functions from Monday to Sunday.
>Frankly they aren't attended by many. We make the effort to fly in
>early already. I think those who are truly interested will as well.
>Otherwise, I think some WG may start running on the weekend anyway since
>they are running out of time during the week.
>
>So what I'm trying to do is move some less critical functions (such as
>comment resolution on P&P ballots) outside the Plenary week altogether.
>This then leaves room to move other functions to Sunday. If I were to
>make the line up, I'd say run the opening EC meeting from 2 to 4 PM.
>Have a 1 hour opening plenary from 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM. Have the meet
>and greet. I'd couple it with a short tutorial about 802 afterward for
>those who haven't been to an 802 meeting before which explains basics
>about work flow and attendance and such. I would move the architecture
>meeting to be during the week, and a normal part of 802.1 activities.
>
>So that's my suggestions. I know the meet and greet would be less well
>attended, but hey that saves us money to. I think it's main purpose
>should be as an introduction for new comers, so I don't see it not being
>well attended as a problem. The key is to activity encourage new
>comings to fly in early for their first Plenary session so as to become
>familiar with the operations of 802.
>
>Frankly, I don't think we should be making these decisions alone. I
>think we should put together a poll with a couple of key questions along
>the lines that 802.11 did, and see what people say. Another possibility
>we should consider is allowing WG to start their plenary meetings on the
>weekend. It seems some groups may already be looking at that. By the
>way, I know some people that flew in Thursday the week before to prep
>for the actual plenary week.
>
>Regards,
>
>Mat
>
>Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
>Senior Member Technical Staff
>BAE SYSTEMS, CNIR
>Office: +1 973.633.6344
>email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-stds-802-sec@listserv.ieee.org
>[mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@listserv.ieee.org] On Behalf Of Tony Jeffree
>Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 5:15 PM
>To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
>Subject: Re: [802SEC] Socials
>
>Mat et al -
>
>If the objective is to fix the problem of inability to converse due to
>the
>noise generated by a large group of people, then moving it to Sunday
>night
>may well be a viable solution, albeit an inequitable one for the reasons
>mentioned by others.
>
>However, it seems clear that there is no real solution that fixes all of
>the objectives of having a social, so I have to agree with Pat that it
>is
>well past time to pension it off. There was a time when it was a useful
>social gathering and/or opportunity for ritual humiliation of the SEC,
>but
>that time is long gone.
>
>Regards,
>Tony
>
>At 21:36 21/11/2004, Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
> >Mat, et all,
> >
> >I would oppose moving the social to Sunday night ... As Geoff mentioned
>in a
> >message, that would exclude a very large number of participants, due to
>the
> >fact that not everyone arrives on Sunday, or at least many arrive quite
>late
> >on Sunday.
> >
> >Also, while it would free up time on Monday, I would also oppose moving
>the
> >opening EC meeting to Sunday for the same reason. It would mean that
>the EC
> >meeting would, effectively, be less open to attendance by interested
> >parties.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Carl
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-stds-802-sec@listserv.ieee.org
> > > [mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@listserv.ieee.org] On Behalf Of
> > > Sherman, Matthew J. (US SSA)
> > > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 6:53 PM
> > > To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> > > Subject: Re: [802SEC] Socials
> > >
> > > Pat,
> > >
> > > An alternative I've raised is the possibility to moving the
> > > Social to Sunday Night as a meet and greet. We can couple it
> > > with an introduction to 802 session. Also, since most of us
> > > are here on Sunday anyway, we can move the opening EC
> > > meetings to Sunday. I'm moving ballot resolution to telecom
> > > so that should make some room.
> > >
> > > Just some ideas.
> > >
> > > Mat
> > >
> > > Matthew Sherman, Ph.D.
> > > Senior Member Technical Staff
> > > BAE SYSTEMS, CNIR
> > > Office: +1 973.633.6344
> > > email: matthew.sherman@baesystems.com
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-stds-802-sec@listserv.ieee.org
> > > [mailto:owner-stds-802-sec@listserv.ieee.org] On Behalf Of Pat
>Thaler
> > > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 6:30 PM
> > > To: STDS-802-SEC@listserv.ieee.org
> > > Subject: [802SEC] Socials
> > >
> > > I think we should put the question raised by 802.11 of
> > > whether to continue having socials to our working groups at
> > > the next plenary. On the one hand, I hate to get rid of the
> > > opportunity to meet each other in a less formal setting than
> > > our meetings. On the other hand, as we get larger it isn't
> > > clear that socials are working.
> > >
> > > It is becoming increasingly difficult to locate people in
> > > these large gatherings.
> > >
> > > The noise level is often so high that conversation is
> > > difficult - a positive feedback loop that results in a hoarse
>throat.
> > >
> > > Because of these factors I know some people don't choose to
> > > attend the social.
> > >
> > > The cost seems much higher than the benefit they are
> > > providing - over $30 a head at the last plenary.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Pat
> > >
> > > ----------
> > > This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
> > > This list is maintained by Listserv.
> > >
> > > ----------
> > > This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email
> > > reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >----------
> >This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
>This
> >list is maintained by Listserv.
>
>Regards,
>Tony
>
>----------
>This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
>This list is maintained by Listserv.
>
>----------
>This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
>This list is maintained by Listserv.
>
>----------
>This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This
>list is maintained by Listserv.
>
>----------
>This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This
>list is maintained by Listserv.
Regards,
Tony
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.