dealing with a larger capacity workshop
I've been wondering if the capacity of the breakout sessions on days two and three of the workshop is greater than that of the big room on the first day, i.e., >80? If so, maybe there are ways we can have more people for the workshop and deal with the room overflow on the first day? As long as we don't have more people than can fit in all of the rooms combined, we'll have room for everyone just not in one room. So what if we simulcasted the main room session in to smaller side rooms? In the end, how these events fill rooms is limited by the Fire Marshall. There is a max capacity under each seating condition. But my thinking is, I'd be willing to give up my chair to get just one more developer in to that seat. In fact, I'd much rather be on my feet making a live webcast of the entire first day happen than occupying a useful chair! Is there some merit in this idea? Anything useful? - Karsten -- name: Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener team: Red Hat Community Architecture & Leadership uri: http://communityleadershipteam.org http://TheOpenSourceWay.org gpg: AD0E0C41
----- Original Message -----
I've been wondering if the capacity of the breakout sessions on days two and three of the workshop is greater than that of the big room on the first day, i.e., >80?
If so, maybe there are ways we can have more people for the workshop and deal with the room overflow on the first day?
As long as we don't have more people than can fit in all of the rooms combined, we'll have room for everyone just not in one room.
So what if we simulcasted the main room session in to smaller side rooms?
In the end, how these events fill rooms is limited by the Fire Marshall. There is a max capacity under each seating condition.
But my thinking is, I'd be willing to give up my chair to get just one more developer in to that seat.
In fact, I'd much rather be on my feet making a live webcast of the entire first day happen than occupying a useful chair!
Is there some merit in this idea? Anything useful?
Just from tlv we've got over 10 people coming, most of whom can sit out of most technical talks (or will be giving talks / workshops). In fact we'll probably use any free time to go on working on the following sessions.
- Karsten -- name: Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener team: Red Hat Community Architecture & Leadership uri: http://communityleadershipteam.org http://TheOpenSourceWay.org gpg: AD0E0C41
_______________________________________________ Project-planning mailing list Project-planning@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/project-planning
no, we need to cap around 80. If we get too large the sessions will become lectures and non-productive for the kick-off workshop. Carl. On 10/07/2011 12:12 AM, Karsten Wade wrote:
I've been wondering if the capacity of the breakout sessions on days two and three of the workshop is greater than that of the big room on the first day, i.e., >80?
If so, maybe there are ways we can have more people for the workshop and deal with the room overflow on the first day?
As long as we don't have more people than can fit in all of the rooms combined, we'll have room for everyone just not in one room.
So what if we simulcasted the main room session in to smaller side rooms?
In the end, how these events fill rooms is limited by the Fire Marshall. There is a max capacity under each seating condition.
But my thinking is, I'd be willing to give up my chair to get just one more developer in to that seat.
In fact, I'd much rather be on my feet making a live webcast of the entire first day happen than occupying a useful chair!
Is there some merit in this idea? Anything useful?
- Karsten
_______________________________________________ Project-planning mailing list Project-planning@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/project-planning
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 09:28:17AM -0400, Carl Trieloff wrote:
no, we need to cap around 80. If we get too large the sessions will become lectures and non-productive for the kick-off workshop.
OK, I see, so your vision of size extends in to the break-out sessions as dividing up one reasonably-sized-pool. Makes sense to me. So we're effectively at 80 people on the RSVP list, with just a few of those placeholders to be filled. (I'm in communication with placeholder owners, no worries.) Here's a quick plan, does this work? 1. At 80 to 85 we draw the line - we can support 85 on the first day in a safe and legal way. 2. Fix website content to say we're full but RSVP if you want to be on a wait list. 3. We do a quick post on Twitter etc. that we're full. Some of us write in our blogs that this happened, good sign of interest, sorry for those who are missing it, more to come. 4. Have some simple, "How to stay involved" information for folks who show interest. For example, I'm going to start a monthly oVirt Bay Area Meetup targeted for mid-December. - Karsten -- name: Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener team: Red Hat Community Architecture & Leadership uri: http://communityleadershipteam.org http://TheOpenSourceWay.org gpg: AD0E0C41
On 10/07/2011 01:23 PM, Karsten Wade wrote:
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 09:28:17AM -0400, Carl Trieloff wrote:
no, we need to cap around 80. If we get too large the sessions will become lectures and non-productive for the kick-off workshop.
OK, I see, so your vision of size extends in to the break-out sessions as dividing up one reasonably-sized-pool. Makes sense to me.
So we're effectively at 80 people on the RSVP list, with just a few of those placeholders to be filled. (I'm in communication with placeholder owners, no worries.)
Here's a quick plan, does this work?
1. At 80 to 85 we draw the line - we can support 85 on the first day in a safe and legal way.
2. Fix website content to say we're full but RSVP if you want to be on a wait list.
3. We do a quick post on Twitter etc. that we're full. Some of us write in our blogs that this happened, good sign of interest, sorry for those who are missing it, more to come.
4. Have some simple, "How to stay involved" information for folks who show interest. For example, I'm going to start a monthly oVirt Bay Area Meetup targeted for mid-December.
For working sessions, would it be possible to stream audio either via a conference call or through an audio streaming service? At UDSes, they tend to project an IRC session and use group note taking software in order to let people remotely participate. Perhaps Dustin knows some more of the specifics on the technologies used. Regards, Anthony Liguori
- Karsten
_______________________________________________ Project-planning mailing list Project-planning@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/project-planning
----- Original Message -----
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 09:28:17AM -0400, Carl Trieloff wrote:
no, we need to cap around 80. If we get too large the sessions will become lectures and non-productive for the kick-off workshop.
OK, I see, so your vision of size extends in to the break-out sessions as dividing up one reasonably-sized-pool. Makes sense to me.
So we're effectively at 80 people on the RSVP list, with just a few of those placeholders to be filled. (I'm in communication with placeholder owners, no worries.)
Do we have any estimate on how many of the rsvps won't show up in the end?
Here's a quick plan, does this work?
1. At 80 to 85 we draw the line - we can support 85 on the first day in a safe and legal way.
2. Fix website content to say we're full but RSVP if you want to be on a wait list.
3. We do a quick post on Twitter etc. that we're full. Some of us write in our blogs that this happened, good sign of interest, sorry for those who are missing it, more to come.
4. Have some simple, "How to stay involved" information for folks who show interest. For example, I'm going to start a monthly oVirt Bay Area Meetup targeted for mid-December.
- Karsten -- name: Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener team: Red Hat Community Architecture & Leadership uri: http://communityleadershipteam.org http://TheOpenSourceWay.org gpg: AD0E0C41
_______________________________________________ Project-planning mailing list Project-planning@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/project-planning
On 10/07/2011 02:23 PM, Karsten Wade wrote:
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 09:28:17AM -0400, Carl Trieloff wrote:
no, we need to cap around 80. If we get too large the sessions will become lectures and non-productive for the kick-off workshop. OK, I see, so your vision of size extends in to the break-out sessions as dividing up one reasonably-sized-pool. Makes sense to me.
So we're effectively at 80 people on the RSVP list, with just a few of those placeholders to be filled. (I'm in communication with placeholder owners, no worries.)
Here's a quick plan, does this work?
1. At 80 to 85 we draw the line - we can support 85 on the first day in a safe and legal way.
2. Fix website content to say we're full but RSVP if you want to be on a wait list.
3. We do a quick post on Twitter etc. that we're full. Some of us write in our blogs that this happened, good sign of interest, sorry for those who are missing it, more to come.
4. Have some simple, "How to stay involved" information for folks who show interest. For example, I'm going to start a monthly oVirt Bay Area Meetup targeted for mid-December.
sounds good, do it at 85, as there are always a few people that can't make it last minute. Carl.
participants (4)
-
Anthony Liguori -
Ayal Baron -
Carl Trieloff -
Karsten Wade