[Mpls-pm] Another lightning talk note

[Lee Carmichael]

Hello Everyone,

--- Dave Rolsky <autarch at urth.org> wrote:

> So folks are doing a pretty bad job at keeping them
> down to 10 minutes or 
> so.  I went way over in answering questions.

I went over too. Sorry about that.

> My question to the group is whether or not this is a
> problem. 

I think trying to stay within timeframes is a good
idea. For all the reason you listed, but as an
informal group and environment it is good for people
to ask questions (during and after talks). Also, being
too strict limits presenters chances to learn about
what they tried to do. But overall I would like to see
the talks stick to their times and have questions be
afterward and take more time if necessary. I would
prefer not to have time be a stopping point of a good
discussion.

> I was thinking of being more strict, and maybe even
> bringing a buzzer or 
> something like that.  Thoughts on this?

I think it works better if the presenter choose the
time they would like to be notified. I would prefer to
know when its halfway in so I can skip items that I
might not think is as necessary and still be able to
conclude in the given time. We still need something at
the end but how about a nice little egg timer. Also,
instead of Dave having to be "The Enforcer" we could
rotate it around so others can help. 

I like the idea that other came up with about choosing
your talk time up 20 minutes. This way we aren't
limited to only small talks.

Lastly, I think two hours is a good length of meeting,
unless we started having beer.

Take Care,

Lee



		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com