Yes, it is useful, especially for those
who can not make it to a meeting. One of the people wanting to attend
a session this week was able to read Jabber items but not post. That
was probably something wrong on their part. However, for our group,
many people like the Jabber idea. Before Jabber was brought in, we
tried to do AOL instant messaging. For example, if one of the editors of
a draft was not able to attend, and we needed an answer to a question,
we put it out on AOL. Those we needed to contact made a point of
being "online." Jabber made it even better. The issue
with Jabber is finding a willing scribe - exactly the question of this
original thread.
Sam Hartman <hartmans@mit.edu> Sent by: owner-wgchairs@ietf.org
11/12/2003 09:52
To
Marshall Rose <mrose+mtr.ietf@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
cc
"Steven M. Bellovin"
<smb@research.att.com>, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org>, wgchairs@ietf.org
Subject
Re: scribes
>>>>> "Marshall" == Marshall
Rose <mrose+mtr.ietf@dbc.mtview.ca.us> writes:
>> It can be useful, for parties not in the room to
be able to
>> "listen". I've used it that way
in the past.
Marshall> exactly. i scribe in one room, so i can read
the output
Marshall> from a scribe in one or two others...
Have you actually tended to find this useful? I've mostly found that
monitoring rooms I'm not in is completely useless. If other people
find this not to be the case, that would be interesting to me.