Re: Various updates, prep notes for speakers

[Amin Bandali]

Hi all,

[ replying to all three of your replies all at once in this message ]

                                 * * *

Sacha Chua writes:

> Hello, all!
>
[...]
>
> Hmm... If we're going to let viewers in, then I'd recommend per-talk BBB
> rooms. The downside is that there's more of a moderation burden. I'd
> recommend using a collaborative pad for questions instead. Then the
> questions can be clearly organized, the speakers may even be able to
> monitor it themselves, it'll be auto-documented, and we don't have to worry
> about overloading BBB. If someone can keep an eye on IRC and put questions
> into the collaborative pad, that would be even better.
>

+1 for using a collaborative pad for the questions.  During the
livestream I can ask people to add their question(s) to the pad as much
as possible; but that if any of them isn't able or willing to do that,
we will try to have one or two volunteers try to collect questions from
IRC into the pad as much as they can.

>
> 3. Should we have our Mumble server as an additional communication
>>    channel besides our IRC channels?  If so, we would probably need to
>>    have at least one or two of us (or other new volunteers) keep an eye
>>    (well, ear ;-)) on our Mumble server and moderate it.  Or should we
>>    keep it under the wraps for the most part and use it only for comms
>>    between ourselves?
>
>
> Tracking multiple audio channels (talk + Mumble) will be too difficult for
> me, I think. I'd prefer to focus on being able to stream parallel sessions.
> But of course, if someone feels strongly about it, they're welcome to take
> the lead on Mumble. :)
>
> Sacha

I see.  Yeah if we end up using Mumble for orga comms, I would highly
recommend using a separate machine for talking on Mumble than the one
you would use for streaming (if you are someone who will be helping
stream the off-main-track bits).  That's what the FSF tech team did
while streaming their recent FSF35 event, and it worked out pretty well
IMHO).  Would using a separate machine be an option for you Sacha, and
would it help reduce the multiple audio channels headache a bit?

                                 * * *

Corwin Brust writes:

> Hi Bandi & Team EmacsConf!
>

Hi Corwin, :-)

[...]
>
> Although the training session from Sacha is my only exposure I'm
> liking BBB so far.
>

Cool; I've been liking it too.

>> In other news, I set up a Mumble server for us at mumble.emacsconf.org.
>> See https://mumble.emacsconf.org for instructions on how to connect to
>> it.  I like to suggest that we use it at least for quick communications
>> between ourselves during the event, since speaking/talking is arguably
>> easier than typing.
>
> I'm well set for handling multiple audio streams; this is fine for me.
>

Awesome.

>> I think we should discuss the following:
>>
>> 1. We should ask our speakers to consider providing us with an
>>    alternative way of reaching them (e.g. via phone) during the event,
>>    in case of an urgent matter during or just before their presentation,
>>    in case we can't get a hold of them via IRC or the main video call
>>    during their talk due to some technical issue or oversight.
>
> +1  - Do we need another person?  Perhaps dedicated to helping with
> organizational comms?  I have someone in mind I could attempt to
> recruit.
>

IIRC Sacha handled that by herself last year, though I may be wrong (I
myself was in a mad scramble trying to do the stream and resolve the
technical issues that kept popping up that morning :-p).

Sacha, what do you think?

>>    We can store these additional information in a temporary private git
>>    repository.  Corwin, Davids, Karl, and Leo, please send me your SSH
>>    pubkey off-list so I could give you access to the private repository.
>
> Sent off-list.
>

Thanks.

[...]
>
> +1
>
> I like pushing all questions to a pad; I also like being flexible and
> staying out of the way of presenters who may be pulling things
> directly from IRC.  The only obvious danger I see would be if a
> presenter could be too focused on IRC and not see questions that came
> from a different channel (broadly ment).   Perhaps some coaching to
> the effect of:
>
> SWAG:  Volunteers will be moving questions into a share note pad.  You
> are also welcome to pull questions directly from the conference IRC
> channels however please do glance and the pad now and again during the
> QA to make sure you see questions passed privately to the organizers.
>
> Having people accessing BBB would be great but I think we won't be
> ready with experimentation and documentation to count on it being
> robust and easy for people.
>

Thanks for your thoughts, Corwin; I generally agree.

I think it comes down to this: will we have enough people-power to
stream all the extended/q&a bits outside the main track?  If yes, then
we don't really have to worry about having people over on BBB.  However,
if streaming those bits off the main track will be a challenge, and if
it will be much easier for the presenters themselves (or one of the
volunteers) to only record their desktop locally, then we would have to
let people on BBB to actually participate, and then we will make the
recording available later for those who weren't able to join in on BBB.

Thoughts?

[...]
>
> I have a raging beast of a machine and various tools such as OBS
> already setup.  No amount of local data storage is likely to be a
> problem given I can record directly out to our FreeNAS server.  I will
> test this and advise if I may be disc space bound.  Otherwise I'm
> happy to record/stream/whatever helps.  I also have, via the
> dugneon-mode project, a pretty nice VM on gigbit fiber in the Chicago
> area.  I can setup RTMP or other things there if it will help.  We've
> got X + VNC going so, in potential, this would make a
> streaming/recording platform for a second volunteer beside myself.  We
> are limited to around 25GB of usable space in that environment.

Fantastic!  So, I believe that means so far we have you and Sacha as
non-primary streamers for the event.

                                 * * *

David Bremner writes:

> Amin Bandali <bandali@gnu.org> writes:
>
>>
>> dto, bremner, and Karl, I'd appreciate it if you too would take a look
>> at the notes and propose/make any changes you deem necessary.
>
> I wonder if we should suggest mics attached to headsets
> as well?  In my experience these cut down on the capture of ambient noise.
>

You mean as opposed to mics built into laptops?

>>    As such, besides the main streamer (likely me), some of us will
>>    likely need to volunteer to stream and/or record the off-track
>>    portion of such talks and to take over when the main streamer moves
>>    on to the next talk.  Those of you who have a machine with decent
>>    specs would you please volunteer to help with this?
>
> I do have the technical ability to make recordings, but I hesitate to
> volunteer further as I am already failing to keep up with my orga
> responsibilities.
>

Oh okay no problem!

>> 3. Should we have our Mumble server as an additional communication
>>    channel besides our IRC channels?  If so, we would probably need to
>>    have at least one or two of us (or other new volunteers) keep an eye
>>    (well, ear ;-)) on our Mumble server and moderate it.  Or should we
>>    keep it under the wraps for the most part and use it only for comms
>>    between ourselves?
>
> My experience is that voice works better between small groups that
> somewhat know each other, or in a kind of hub and spoke ("classroom")
> scenario where one person controls the discussion. Other people might
> have different experience, and it certainly adds a much needed human
> touch, so if others are positive about a public mumble server, feel
> free.

Right.  Since we will likely not have enough orgs/volunteers to keep an
ear on Mumble during the event, it would probably be a good idea to not
have it a secondary comm channel for the audience this year, and use it
only among ourselves organizers, if even that.

                                 * * *

Thanks for your input, y'all.  I think since we're not yet 100% decided
about whether or not have the audience join the BBB rooms for Q&A etc
when the main stream has moved on, and our exact BBB setup, I will not
mention it on the "prepare" page or the email I will be sending to the
speakers about it, and say that we will clarify and talk about that in a
future email.

I'm hoping to prepare and send out the email with a link to the
"prepare" page by tomorrow night.

-amin

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature