[PD] Pd book sprint in NYC/Berlin

Hans-Christoph Steiner hans at eds.org
Thu Mar 19 12:19:10 CET 2009


I have also had a number of bad voice/video meetings and some decent  
IRC meetings.  I'd really like to experiment with the combination of  
all of the above.  I think that a voice conference together with IRC  
could be a really useful combination.  For example, its hard to know  
when someone wants to speak next in a voice conference, in a physical  
meeting , that kind of queuing is really well handled with eye  
contact, and small hand gestures, which can happen while someone is  
talking.  I think that kind of thing could happen in IRC, like people  
type in "I'd like to respond", so for big chunks of talking, that  
would be handled over voice, then the little bits like figuring out  
who will speak next could be handled in IRC.

For the book sprint, I think it would probably work differently.  Like  
a constant, async, low volume chatter on IRC, then when some people  
want to work out an approach to a chapter or topic, they would switch  
to voice chat and have a discussion.

.hc

On Mar 18, 2009, at 3:45 AM, dmotd wrote:

> i should probably avoid writing emails before bed, and my negative  
> bias
> towards video-conferencing comes from a number of bad experiences and
> unproductive meetings. anyhow you are quite right to push this one, to
> converse without latency can be very productive (but equally  
> unproductive
> too) - a good meeting requires a fair bit more preparation and  
> planning than
> just the medium, regardless of mcluhans philosophy. incidentally i  
> have
> enjoyed his musings in the past but i already find his arguments  
> ambiguous
> enough with regard to psychology and technology, to retrofit his  
> ideologies
> to todays baffling techno-communcications wasteland is a bit of a  
> stretch ;)
>
> ciao,
> dmotd
>
> On Tuesday 17 March 2009 21:41:46 Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>> Yeah, in case I came across too strong, I think that IRC is very
>> useful, and voice chat is too.  We can have both running for this
>> meeting, and people can choose where they participate.  IRC is great
>> for async communications, like asking specific questions.  But I find
>> it takes 10-20x longer to work through difficult issues thru text- 
>> only
>> media like IRC, IM, email, etc. as compared to a voice conversation.
>>
>> .hc
>>
>> On Mar 16, 2009, at 7:32 PM, João Pais wrote:
>>> Is this a one time thing, or might happen more times? I would say
>>> that at least voice connection would be productive. I haven't that
>>> much experience with video conferencing, but a medium where people
>>> can react at the same time they can think would be important.
>>> (although after too much time, even the fingers are faster than some
>>> heads)
>>>
>>> How about voice connection for general talk + an irc chat for small,
>>> fast questions? We can also send a group foto with skype, so that
>>> everyone feels the warmth.
>>>
>>>> Marshall McLuhan would strongly disagree with you, as do I.  The
>>>> medium with which you communicate has a very strong impact on the
>>>> conversation.  That does not mean that it is the only influence.
>>>> There are many things that lead to a bad meeting, and from my
>>>> experience of having many meetings in person, on IRC, on IM, on
>>>> phones, on voice chat, on video chat, and many different mixes
>>>> above, I am a strong believer in high-bandwidth communication like
>>>> voice.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> -
>>
>> Mistrust authority - promote decentralization.  - the hacker ethic
>



----------------------------------------------------------------------------

News is what people want to keep hidden and everything else is  
publicity.          - Bill Moyers






More information about the Pd-list mailing list