draft-async: Incorporate feedback from IETF 109 session

[mallory]

Questions:
* Matthew Gillmore - struck me to being similar to my life experience - have 5 kids in 4 different schools! Would like to see a standardised education plan across different schools. Could we be industry leaders of best practices leaders for what all these schools are going through
* Mallory: would be nice for IETF to document this kind of meeting style. Best practices.
* Martin Duke - confused about what you're proposing for IETF. For IETF mailing list, would just you say "meeting now, 6 topics, thread for each of them, go!"
* Mallory: needs a lot more planning that that, needs to be well thought out (speak to authors in advance, etc)
* Martin: something I really value in a synchronous meeting is that they're single threaded - it's an opportunity to get everyone to pay attention to a thing at once. Wonder if there's a way to structure that so there's a topic for the day or few days.
* Mallory: like those additions.
* Doesn't preclude you from having synchronous moments.
* Larry Masinter: wanted to ask about the git working group idea, which is a hybrid with having issues.
* Mallory: cool, like a sprint. Use infrastructure which already exists.
* Larry: working groups who don't meet at all, don't get tourists so much. What do we do for those?
* Bron Gondwana: this is kind of something we already do! Github issues may be better. Excess attention overspill in face to face meetings is where the serendipity comes from, it's hard to keep people's attention.
* Mallory: moderation on lists is definitely a thing that you need to keep threads on topic.
* Ted Lemon: the idea of having 3 focus groups in different timezones take it in turns to look at things. Worried that this would turn into a sociology experiment. Find git issues to be not helpful - the hard bit isn't finding out what thread to look at, it's maintaining current state of thought.
* Ted: found that the document was thin on a lot of the things discussed in the slides today.
* Charles (from John Klensin): do you need to have rate limiting to stop a few people flooding the conversation with back and forth?
* Mallory: yeah, saw that one. In that case, call a synchronous meeting to hash out the issue.
* Charles (as self): a wiki or something like that would be better than emails for this kind of thing. Email doesn't work too well for that. Like the idea, but not the tool.
* Mallory: as far as organising space, APC always has a wiki for that. Open to including other mediums, but there's going to be a tradeoff.
* Phillip Hallam-Baker: github is alien technology to me. I and some others put together an "open meeting" for Al Gore many years ago. Have worked in other standards groups. Most useful use of synchronous time has been discussion a known list of issues. It's a question of how you use them and how the tools interact.
* Mallory: agree.