[FOSS4G2016] weekly IRC meeting

Wed Oct 21 03:36:40 PDT 2015

To all,

As the suggested time coincides with my Weekly call with the US (by Google Hangout ;-) I will gladly take the opportunity to be on an IRC channel with you at the same time.

This multi-tasking opportunity makes me - all of a sudden - a real IRC champion!

Vriendelijke groet,
Marc Vloemans

> Op 21 okt. 2015 om 09:11 heeft Gert-Jan van der Weijden <gert-jan at osgeo.nl> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> Hi LOC,
> 
> I'll be there on monday at 5 pm CET (otherwise I would be in the regular traffic jam anyway).
> No matter what channel we choose (IRC, Slack, Hangout), most important is to have an agenda, a chair and a scribe.
> 
> First proposal for an agenda-item for this Monday: arrange a FOSS4G2016 organisation hacking weekend in November, in ordr to make some serious steps forward.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> GJ
> 
> 
> 
> till.adams at fossgis.de schreef:
> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> Darrrell, Marc, Volker, thanks for your comments on that.
>> @Marc, I do not feel in a pitiable situation ;-) - other teams had and always will have the same problem ;-)
>> 
>> Although I like to pick up proposals and also like to cash in from experiences past teams made, I'd like us to keep the suggested weekly IRC meeting. From my own company experience I know that meetings, that are not once a week or once a month don't work. You never know, is it this week, is it next week or was it last week...?
>> 
>> Also, if we recognize, that IRC is not appropriate we can change every time ;-)
>> 
>> So, first IRC meeting for LOC will be 26.10.2015 at 5 p.m. CET:
>> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=FOSS4G+Weekly+IRC+Meeting&iso=20151026T17&p1=312&ah=1
>> 
>> Thanks, Till
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Am 2015-10-21 00:12, schrieb Volker Mische:
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> I don't agree with Darell and Marc. Meeting over IRC can also be very
>>> efficient and I've seen those meetings. The problem with running them
>>> over voice is that people there also need to be efficient, if there are
>>> not, text can be faster. I see several advantages:
>>> 
>>> - Many people can "speak" at once
>>> - You don't need to interrcommiserateupt someone
>>> - It's easier to speak up and disagree (e.g. if you are more of a
>>> silent person)
>>> - You have everything in written
>>> - Watchers can just join an lurk
>>> - You might want to attend, mostly for listening or just for one small
>>> item, you can do something next to it
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Volker
>>> 
>>>> On 10/20/2015 11:51 PM, Marc Zakelijk wrote:
>>>> I agree with Darrel; voice beats text in efficiency.
>>>> commiserate
>>>> I see where Jeff comes from.
>>>> But for needed history and monitoring a central doc will suffice when at least capturing;
>>>> - planning per sub-committee and master planning
>>>> - each agenda item has; A(ctivity statement ), B((enefit clearly defined,  otherwise activity ditched), C(oncern or risk assessment of intended action success) and D(o r action stated to overcome concern)
>>>> - each activity has people who are R(responsible, who has to Do something), A(countable, who monitors progress), (to be) C(onsulted, for possible advice), (to be) I(nformed, but stays out of the way as much as possible ;-)
>>>> - there is only 1 Responsible person per task, 1 Accountable, a few to be Consulted, and more to be Informed
>>>> - is a task or activity too large for one person it gets divided into smaller tasks with maybe more people involved
>>>> 
>>>> I commiserate with Till.
>>>> Before everyone suffers from inertia;
>>>> - Without a Program (you can read Product) there is no idea of who feels/is invited as audience/Buyers of tickets (academia, developers, non-tech end-users, public sector orgs, NGO's, commercial orgs, etc)
>>>> - Without an intended audience-segmentation there is no effective promotion possible, nor can sponsors be sure their particular audience is present.
>>>> - Without targeted promotion the overall attendance suffers and cross-pollination between sub-groups suffers too.
>>>> - Without sponsors it will be a rather Spartan affair or very expensive.
>>>> 
>>>> My two cents.
>>>> 
>>>> Vriendelijke groet,
>>>> Marc Vloemans
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Op 20 okt. 2015 om 22:53 heeft Darrell Fuhriman <darrell at garnix.org> het volgende geschreven:
>>>>> 
>>>>> For 2014 we started with bi-weekly meetings and only moved to weekly meetings in August. I thought it was sooner than that, but apparently not.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I totally disagree about the IRC/Slack thing, IMNSHO. It’s a far, far slower way to communicate than voice. A well run meeting is going to be many times faster.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The main thing is:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Designate a note taker to:
>>>>> • Track New TODOs
>>>>> * Track decisions made
>>>>> 
>>>>> The note taker is always different from the person running the meeting.
>>>>> 
>>>>> At each meeting, we created a google document for the next meeting, and people could add to the agenda at any time up until the time of the meeting. Notes were then taken in that same document.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Always follow up on old TODOs, both to nag and to check for relevancy.
>>>>> 
>>>>> If you want an effective meeting, learn how to run an effective meeting. They don’t happen by accident.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Darrell
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Oct 19, 2015, at 06:31, Jeff McKenna <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Yes at some point soon you should move to a weekly meeting.  I have seen some past committee teams use IRC successfully (there is the #foss4g channel on freenode that is mostly empty, awaiting your use), and also phone conference calls using audio (it could be a weekly hangout with audio).  But personally I find that IRC meetings are much more "get down to business" than the audio calls ("hi how was your weekend?"), so I have a preference for the IRC text chat (or Slack, but that seems to offend some Open Source "oldtimers" so IRC it is, ha).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -jeff
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 2015-10-19 5:41 AM, till.adams at fossgis.de wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi LOC!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> This is a really honest eamil but unfortunately it looks like, that it
>>>>>>> is necessary.
>>>>>>> I know, that everybody involved in LOC also has a normal job and I also
>>>>>>> understand that not everybody of you can act like I am doing.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> But...we are now in a situation where I really must **rely** on
>>>>>>> everybody's contributions!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I think that at least it should be possible to everyone, who gets asked
>>>>>>> about s.th. which is in your personal area of responsibility to reply to
>>>>>>> a question in a short email.
>>>>>>> And if the reply is: "Sorry, I am short in time for now, but I will work
>>>>>>> on this on [...]" - that's also fair and nobody will be angry about that.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> !!!The worst thing you can do (to all other people involved in LOC) is
>>>>>>> to do/write/say nothing!!!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please note, that we are far away from having too much time for
>>>>>>> organization and I really would like to get us all in motion for the
>>>>>>> upcoming tasks!
>>>>>>> The most urgent things are:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -> add more info on the homepage (@Anja, Carmen asked last week about
>>>>>>> having a meeting this week?)
>>>>>>> -> fix sponsorship and exhibition packages (@Arnulf and @Hinrich: still
>>>>>>> no reply from you)
>>>>>>> -> fix our contract with WCCB (wrote a question on this a few minutes ago)
>>>>>>> -> fix of our timetable and with that all the upcoming tasks
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> So please, please let us get these things in motion!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Maybe having a hangout or IRC chat once a week would make communication
>>>>>>> easier? Our monthly meetings are good but mainly restricted to people
>>>>>>> located in Bonn
>>>>>>> What do you think? Any other ideas on that?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> So far, Till
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
>>>>>> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
>>>>> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
>>>> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
>>> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
>> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016
> 
> 
> Gert-Jan van der Weijden
> Voorzitter Stichting OSGeo.nl
> _______________________________________________
> FOSS4G2016 mailing list
> FOSS4G2016 at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2016