Re: IETF 63 On-line Survey

[Tony Hansen <tony at att.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

The sessions where floating mikes worked well were smaller in size,
attendance wise. In fact, most of the time, the main reason for using
the floating mikes was *not* so that everyone in the *room* could hear
what was being said, but instead so that people listening in on the
*audio stream* could hear what was being said.

In larger rooms, the dynamics are much different, and floating mikes
would not work as well.

	Tony Hansen
	tony at att.com

James M. Polk wrote:
> 
> floating mics are a bad idea for many reasons - each getting worse with
> room and or audience size increasing.
> 
> Who is in charge of who's next to speak?
> Who passes the mics to the folks in the middle of a row who didn't
> bother to get up?
> Turning of heads happens now to know places (mics in the aisles), but
> because seated persons are not standing, they cannot be easily seen,
> causing some confusion and general discomfort in the audience to "find
> the person", then "find their face" to know who's saying what - which is
> important sometimes.
> 
> Few people talk during sessions, and those that do, know to sit where
> they can readily get to a mic to make a point. I see nothing wrong with
> keeping this layout
> 
>> Participants are more than capable of turning their heads
>> but when holding a technical discussion those extra mics make a
>> significant difference.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDBLOdxsSylYhzrRYRAqPWAKC++Dj/Eh55CgL36ppw/hUiBy2gmACfbZKj
0H065ZkT23fJfq58v2jRiIA=
=HW0c
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf