[governance] Remote participation at Vilnius IGF 2010

[Carlos A. Afonso]

I second Adam on this. It was possible to remain in the main sessions 
while watching any of the workshops with excellent quality.

One major problem I hope the logistics wizards consider seriously for 
the next IGF: several workshop rooms did not have any sound proofing. In 
some seats one could listen to one or more neighboring workshops, 
sometimes better than the one s/he was sitting on... Since remote access 
worked fine, many people moved to quieter places to listen and watch 
them -- but could not interact.

--c.a.

On 09/29/2010 09:38 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
> The facilities made available for remote participation were amazing:
> video and real time transcripts from every room a great achievement.
>
> During security, openness, privacy session Kieren did a very good job of
> bringing in the remote hubs and also telling us of how many people were
> there in a particular place: 44 people in Dhaka, naming the hubs that
> were following and chatting. Gave a good sense that we weren't alone in
> the room, the hubs started to became a real people rather than something
> off in the ether.
>
> Suggest next time each of the hubs and moderators are encouraged to find
> out who is online, how many, where are they. Make them more real.
>
> Adam
>
>
>> Olivier's well documented challenges here are quite real.
>>
>> Not wanting to simplify the problem too much ... but it might be
>> useful to break this down to its most fundamental. To me, from both a
>> technical and business view, it appears to be a matter of perspective
>> and priority.
>>
>> For this to really work and for the technicians to fully "get" what
>> the objectives are, each IGF Workshop or Event should, in fact,
>> be philosophically treated as an old school "Webinar", in a manner of
>> speaking, as opposed to a dealing with it as an in situ event/workshop
>> with Remote Participants being seen as the "outsiders".
>>
>> I expect that if we adopt this perspective then the most basic issues
>> of how to best wire the PA systems, how remote participants engage
>> with the Event as equals (for eg. simple things as whether the
>> presentation being viewed in situ is the identical to and moves at the
>> same speed as the one in the possession of the Remote Moderation
>> "hat") will actually be resolved relatively easily ... putting the
>> more logistical issues of bandwidth, delays, acoustics etc. aside for
>> the moment.
>>
>> Of course, having the actual architects/engineers of the Remote
>> Participation technology engaged at all stages (including in situ)
>> will also be more than useful.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Tracy
>>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

-- 

Carlos A. Afonso
CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
====================================
new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
====================================
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t