I have mild
myopia
and
tinnitus. Neither are much of an issue in close range,
but each imply data loss and/or require extra concentration for
picking up signals at a distance. Normally, I compensate for
this by choosing a seat up near the front and/or the middle of any
grouping whenever possible.
However, in the current
meeting that I am at, I found that all of the participants were
given assigned seating. And my seat turned out to be in a far
corner.
Compensating for myopia is simple. I have glasses which I
typically only use for driving. But the audio portions of the
meeting are far, far more important, and quite frankly the
acoustics in this room are lousy. The situation is better
when presenters use the microphone, and not an issue in breakout
sessions, but crucial portions — such as the summarization of
the first portion of the meeting — were done as an open
discussion without any use of microphones.
Luckily for me, there is an official backchannel in this
meeting. Whereas my hearing loss is minor, one of the
participant's hearing loss is far more acute. So there is a
person dedicated to taking official notes in realtime and this is
done via IRC. Others have the opportunity to listen in and/or
contribute... something that has been important for the times where
the note taker can't hear important points.
And based on the discussion in IRC, it appears that I am not the
only person to note that it easier to read the summary in IRC than
listen to the actual presentation.
If it's easier and better to read a second-hand transcription, wouldn't it be easier and better yet for the presenter to just write out what he has to say, with no stumbling or mistakes, and put it up somewhere where people could ask questions and he could revise and clarify based on those questions, without involving any airfare or jet lag or hotels or taxis or missed dance recitals or phone calls substituting for anniversary dinners?
Yeah, I'm a curmudgeon and a hermit, but dammit, I really like text. I don't know more than a dozen people, lifetime, who do a better job of explaining something aloud than they do by carefully writing it down and then taking written comments.
Interesting post from Sam Ruby on using backchannel to overcome hearing problems and bad acoustics. While MeshForum will be held in a good space, we'll want to ensure we have this type of backchannel available. Luckily for me, there is......
[more]
That isn't accommodation. You should get whatever seat you need to understand the speaker-- even right next to him or her. If that isn't good enough, arrange for real-time captioning or CART.
It isn't a privilege or a courtesy to be accommodated in a business meeting; it's a legal necessity. Stick up for yourself.
If I held a meeting like that, and knew Sam Ruby or Shelley Powers sat in the audience, I would make sure they heard (and understood) what I was saying, at least if I knew about their disabilities in advance. Speak up, goddammit! #:-)
I also have tinnitus. If Sam is like me, you just don't think about 'speaking up'. You think it will be open seating and then when you discover you're stuck at the back of the room, you start looking for ways to compensate.
Being able to hear is not exactly a binary thing. I found that I could understand some speakers better than others.
I was not the only one that had difficultly hearing. In fact, many had difficulty hearing when I spoke unless I was speaking directly into the mike.
On day two there wasn't an official policy of assigned seating, so I chose to violate the unofficial yet seemingly universal social norm of choosing the same seat on the second day. I opted instead to sit front and center.
(re the earlier discussion of whether to write things down instead of giving speeches)
Edward Tufte advocates a system where all the facts and opinions the parties have coming in are written up nicely. Then the beginning of the meeting (or before) is spent reading these briefs. Then an informed discussion can be had, with reference to the printed material. In this way, each medium does what it does best: paper communicates the facts, while f2f discussion allows the dialogue.
(Ironically, however, Tufte advocated this system while giving a one-day "I talk, you listen, no questions" course. The only explanation I could come up with was that the course was more entertainment than education.)
Scoble nails how to be persuasive about a product so thoroughly that I can't add anything, only talk around the edges about a preference for blog posts over conference presentations, and the importance of linking to anything, even if you think your...