Talk:WikiProject remote event participation

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Types of barriers this project will address[edit]

Currently this project has the name "WikiProject Remote Event Participation".

In these early conversations there is a presumption that we should make live events accessible over geographical barriers. I agree, and also we can do more. Here are some other barriers

  1. Live events can still be inaccessible because of time barriers, either for time zone differences or because of schedule conflicts
  2. The notes mention language barriers
  3. The notes mention barriers to accessing presentation slides, which is still a big wiki challenge with most slides having non-free components and being imcompatible with wiki remote sharing
  4. The wiki community still struggles with barriers to accessing source materials, which is one resource barrier
  5. Some presenters in the wiki movement have much easier access to journalists and media support at events to showcase their projects. Granting more community paid staff journalism support removes barriers to a presentation having impact and reach.
  6. Since at least 2012 the majority of presentations at Wikimedia events include at least one speaker who is either paid to give the presentation or a professional Wikipedia contributor. Space on the program is scarce and volunteers are greatly underrepresented in accessing it.

Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:41, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Remote participation[edit]

MassiveEartha At the Wikimedia Cafe meetup you asked about organizing for remote participation. Such as it is, this group seems like the place for that. Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:12, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry: thanks!! MassiveEartha (talk) 22:08, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Ok EdH620 (talk) 15:04, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Remote Event participation for Wikimania 2020[edit]

Hello,

what do you think are possibilities to participate at Wikimania 2020 from your home. After the test at the Wikimania this year I think that Videos are problematic because of the Bandwith and so phone calls are better. I think it were great if it is possible to call the Wikimedians who are at the Wikimania and speak with them. At else it were great if it is possible to listen to the meetings and presentations via a phone call. In the system what was used for the test in August at last Wikimania there were phone numbers from many countrys. What ideas for remote participation do you have and who is responsible for this at the Wikimania organization team and what do they know about that. -- Hogü-456 (talk) 19:20, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

I think we should absolutely plan for different formats allowing remote participation, and I just proposed one mechanism to explore that below. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:16, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Remote participation Wikimania learning pattern[edit]

Hi all!

Together with Ainali (talk · contribs) and Audrey Lebioda, Nationalmuseum (talk · contribs), I am in the process of writing down a brief learning pattern / documentation on the Wikimania wiki on remote participation, to be used for future Wikimania organizers. It would be great to have your input in the process! You can either give it here, or in the discussion page of the page on the Wikimania wiki, or by editing directly. Eric Luth (WMSE) (talk) 10:09, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

I went there to start edit, but was confused. I put my questions on the talk page. Ainali (talk) 17:18, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
I went ahead and restructured the page. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 22:30, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Workshop to hash out suitable parametrizations for remote events[edit]

I just proposed a workshop on how to plan remote events. Since that workshop would be taking place at a WikiCite event, it is framed around WikiCite, but I think the basic methodology can be reused in other contexts, both within and beyond Wikimedia. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:15, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikimedia Summit going virtual[edit]

As just announced, the Wikimedia Summit 2020 as an in-person invent is canceled and will be replaced by some virtual means yet to be determined. Would be great if we could help make that happen. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:31, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Virtual unconference[edit]

I propose we hold an unconference in two phases: in phase one we propose and dot-vote on topics. Except unlike a physical unconference with an agenda set by dot-voting, we just keep adding threaded comments to our original dot-votes, and then in a much later phase two for wikis, the proposals are re-sorted from chronological by order of submission to e.g. number of comments received, or a combined measure of that and some other quality score(s)? EllenCT (talk) 08:58, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Example format[edit]

== Welcome to the wiki-unconference ==
Please propose topics as follows:
=== Proposal 1 === <!-- Use title phrases instead of "Proposal 1" -->
Proposal descriptions here.
* Proposal !votes here....
:: Proposal discussion here,
or here.
==== Sub-proposal 1.1 ====
....
===== Action: item 1.1.1 ===== <!-- Replace "item 1.1.1" with title -->
.....
=== Proposal 2 ===
....

I copied the above to Talk:Wikimedia Summit 2020/Program because it is compatible with Wikimedia Summit 2020/Program Design Process. EllenCT (talk) 09:14, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Concrete example[edit]

== Welcome to the virtual dog show ==

Please propose topics as follows:
 === Proposal 1 === <!-- Use title phrases instead of "Proposal 1" -->
 Proposal descriptions here.
 * Proposal !votes here....
 :: Proposal discussion here,
 or here.
 ==== Sub-proposal 1.1 ====
 ....
 ===== Action: item 1.1.1 ===== <!-- Replace "item 1.1.1" with title -->
 .....
 === Proposal 2 ===
 ....

=== Photo uploads ===
Let's put photos of our dogs on Commons. --Alice
* <s>good idea, I'm in</s> second choice --Bob
* yes let's --Carol
* won't they get deleted? --Dan
:: Oh, maybe? --Carol
==== How about Imgur? ====
Or both, to be on the safe side? --Dan
: Would we put the imgur link in the caption in case they got deleted? --Carol
:: That works for me. --Alice
* first choice --Bob
* okay yes --Carol
===== Action: email participants reminding to upload =====
Which one of us has the attendee list? --Alice
=== Judging procedure ===
How about grooming, poise, obedience, and endurance? --Dan
: On a five-point scale for each? --Carol
:: Sure, but combined with the mean or the median? --Dan
....

Does anyone have questions? EllenCT (talk) 18:10, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikimania remote participation page[edit]

I added this text to wikimania:Remote participation#Remote only:

A virtual unconference can start asynchronously before the scheduled meeting, and optionally transition to synchronous requirements, e.g. response deadline cut-off times, teleconferencing, or etherpad or other shared docs supplementation as agreed by the participants. When supplementing with a teleconference, please remember to take notes for the non-attendees as above.

If this is moved to the content page from talk, please update that and other inbound links. EllenCT (talk) 19:27, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

China-compatible teleconferencing[edit]

@Fuzheado: that chart is great! I have been told by a senior executive of a major Chinese company with operations in the US that Bluejeans.com from the en:Bluejeans Network company is the only teleconferencing system of its kind which reliably operates across the Chinese boundary. I don't know anything about why, nor have I looked in to it, and don't want to speculate. I do want to ask if you can confirm this, and whether you know of others, please? EllenCT (talk) 17:37, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Good question - not sure about the China options though we should try to do some research on it. -- Fuzheado (talk) 03:46, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Adding another service[edit]

@Fuzheado: I came across this one: https://www.gotomeeting.com/ It seems to be a proprietary one and it's still a bit unclear to me how it works, but some people were singing it praises on Twitter. Another option is Uberconference: uberconference.com we've been using it but so far it's similar to other options like Zoom, etc. I'm watching this list a lot. Do you think it would be useful to also gather information around methodologies? Scann (talk) 16:22, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, yes both GoToMeeting and Uberconference are decent options. The former is a paid service and Uberconference is largely phone conferncing. We can certainly add them to the mix -- Fuzheado (talk) 16:24, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Examples of remote first meetups[edit]

I listed these

@Pharos, Pine, and FULBERT: thanks for developing the online meeting model. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:45, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

I think this section should link to a few instances of showcase meetings rather than organizations. Otherwise soon we will just have all affiliates there and there is no real value added by the list. Ainali (talk) 19:15, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
@Ainali: The novelty of these groups is that none have in-person meetings. An organization which is primarily online has different behavior than groups which have in-person meetings. If there are precedents of other Wikimedia affiliates which have prioritized online meetings above in-person ones I would like to see what they set up. Do you have examples?
I expect that soon everyone will be posting their experiments, just as everyone now is looking for precedent. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:19, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Discussion in Telegram chat[edit]

Chico: On a more serious note on that issue, I'm not terribly worried about the increase in traffic on the remote solutions backend. If they have competent engineers they would have designed a scalable solution and will likely already starting to test and perhaps implement these. They are not intractable problems.

On the other hand, ISPs across the world is something that scares me. I know my own city has terrible internet infrastructure and would crumble in the face of daily video use even by 10% of university students. Europe is a bit better in this area, but the US isn't much better than Brazil outside of the biggest cities.

Andrew: That is most definitely a concern - the reconfiguration of regional Internet connections to reflect the massive shift of corporate broadband to residential, as many white collar workers and students start to sap bandwidth at times ISPs are not used to dealing with.

However to the first point, we have already seen that "remote solutions" are being taxed and especially for free/open solutions, it's not clear we can assume the engineers will implement "scalable solutions." In fact, one of the major benevolent (ie. free) portals for BigBlueButton was mconf.org, and they just shut down because they could no longer afford to give away computing and bandwidth for free. This happened this past week because of COVID-19 demand.

Richard Knipel: I do think one of the solutions would be a "richer" text chat experience - something more in the direction from IRC to Telegram to Slack to maybe a bit beyond.
Andrew: I certainly favor us, as a community, going towards free/gratis/libre solutions as much as possible, but the more we look around, the commercial entities are the ones that are delivering consistent global scalable solutions. So I'd like to at least put us in the right mindset that there are tradeoffs with choosing certain solutions based on ideology. The two big "free" candidates for video-based conferencing have seen significant issues - Jitsi and BigBlueButton - but we will continue testing, and encourage folks to be involved!
Richard: Or other solutions that are not necessarily video-based.
Andrew: Yes, though we largely have those already and are looking towards amping up options for interaction.
Chico: fair point. But for open source solutions we can probably work out a hosted solution with Wikimedia resources. It is not as though the movement is without resources.
Andrew: Maybe? That's why I was wondering if we could investigate the previous Jitsi installation on Wikimedia servers and figure out what the experiences might have been like. There's also limitations with everyone in the world trying to route to the one datacenter we have that is optimized for web serving and not interactive real-time video
Jan: Hmm, if we set up a stable Jitsi instance that works because WMF is good with servers and can scale them up. If the word gets around, possibly a bunch of non-wikimedians might want to freeload on that. How can we from the start try to avoid this?
Chico: true, but push-comes-the-shove and with some proofs of concept I want to believe WMF would support a solution like this with production resources and that is A LOT better for this use than Cloud Services. Lets not forget WMF hosts one of the biggest repositories of media (commons), that is not exactly the same as streaming but is in the same league in regards to bandwidth required. IIRC they can be setup with some authorization. We could tie them even to Wikipedia groups... (and perhaps have specific groups setup in a Wiki? we have several Wikis that could be used like that)
Andrew: Reading through some of the Jitsi documentation, there is support for LDAP, but not sure how hard/easy it is
Chico: The other side of this is we have several open services on the web. I don't recall any of them actually being abused by "freeloaders" (surprising to me as well). In maintaining PAWS this is a common thing I look for as it might also be used for other, more malicious, purposes.

The closest situation I'm aware of is some maps servers that are used by OSM and some other open source projects since toolserver was a thing. This use case might not be approved today, but the Cloud Services team won't drop them since its an active running service with a long time in existence for an open source project. The biggest issue this caused was that no one knew how the thing worked, TheDJ volunteered some time to upgrade its OS some time ago. Jitsi has LDAP support by default, yeah. That already covers wikitech accounts (which are LDAP), and we could perhaps add everyone who needs to use it to the Cloud VPS group without permissions to touch any of the servers...

Shouldn't take too long for me or other that have experience with Wikimedia auth to create a specific mediawiki authenticator either. But might not be worth the time if we can get away with LDAP (WikiTech accounts) tied in with a specific group (this can be a cloud vps project).

In all, I think it would be better to discuss these details with a Jitsi instance actually running and with the Cloud Services Team actually validating the design choices.

Jan: Well LDAP towards what, a Wikimedia account? It looks like anyone can get that ;)
Chico: Wikitech is LDAP and we can tie with the Cloud VPS project, so we could controll exactly who has access, if need be.
Kim: I'm concerned about issues of accessibility too. Whom are we leaving out by choosing certain solutions?

Videoconferencing doesn't come with captions, yet things like irc work with screenreaders.

(everyone agrees with Kim, suggest other options such as Google Meets, and someone says it can be done).

Scann: might I jump in and say something around the factibility of committing WMF engineers to whatever other task? everyone is currently a bit overloaded, specially in the US where I'm figuring most WMF engineers are based in. it seems unrealistic to add more tasks to their plate (they already had their tasks assigned for this year before this came) so it might be a good thing to say "let's explore this option for the future", but as for today it seems to me that the better approach might be not to overburden people by adding tasks on their plate, and just stick to solutions that have proven to work and are viable NOW
Jan: They might not need to do much more than approve upscaling of server resources in wikitech projects
Andrew: For sure - I don't think any of us had any realistic expectations that we'd be able to get a significant chunk of any engineer's time. :) Any of the CloudVPS stuff we were talking about would be us spinning up the instances within containers we would initiate. But you do bring up an interesting point - if we are indeed not spending money on multiple conferences, we are saving $10,000 to $100,000s of dollars. It may be easier just to apply that $$$ to a plug-and-play solution or service and just make our lives a lot easier. ie. It might be easier to just spend money for globally reliable and scalable AWS, Google Cloud or Azure resources

concerns around ethical practices of some of these companies, including treatment to employees

Chico: My idea of taking it from PoC to Production servers is a very far in the future idea, not immediate at all. Sorry if I did not make it clear.
Jan: Easier yes, but not a long term solution. That we can do to save this years events. But we should use this time to invest in the long-term as well. What would be good is the WMF acknowledging they miss this skill and start hiring a new dedicated team.
Chico: My concern is it is "less sustainable" in the long term. But short and medium term it is definitely better, perhaps the only solution.
Andrew: True! If you take all the $$$ not spent from all the conferences this year, it may be enough to fund 2-3 FTE. Maybe that's our radical proposal? Short term contractor funding using conference funds to hire an engineer to support technical solutions for remote collaboration. I mean, not our only proposal, but a consideration for the WMF. Right, even if it could justify shifting an existing staffer to focus on this, and hiring into other places on the tech team, that would be useful.
Scann: so then 1) plug & play, and 2) invest in mid to long term solutions?
Chico: I would phrase something like Create new positions (contractors or staff), funded perhaps with the unspent conferences funds, to support technical solutions for remote collaboration. Specifically we would like to see video conferencing and other remote participation tools for the movement in a sustainable basis.

saving this per Andrew's suggestion. Scann (talk) 19:36, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Tips from Mozilla Open Leaders lead[edit]

Hi all

Abby has been running Mozilla Open Leaders for several years, its a great online programme. She's put together some tips for working remotely that could be helpful

https://twitter.com/abbycabs/status/1237001927734542341

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 22:41, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

added to chart[edit]

Hi, I added WhatsApp to the chart but I also saw it listed under things to investigate. So if the chart is limited to only "recommended" apps and there isn't consensus about WhatsApp, feel free to remove it.Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 22:43, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Research Data Alliance converted to symposium to be online starting this week[edit]

The Research Data Alliance has moved it's current conference that was meant to be over the next five days to in stead be online across 18 march - 10 Apr (several sessions of high interest to wikimedians):

What was previously $700 is now free and was re-organised with only 1 week's notice. Possible learning items for a remote Wikimania? It's a mixed working-group and plenary session based format that is highly relevant to wikimedia movement. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 04:33, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Drawbacks of remote participation[edit]

Could someone please list the downsides of the remote participation so that we could think about going around / improving them? I see three, but I am pretty sure there are more, and that people have though about it:--Ymblanter (talk)

  • Time difference: It is impossible to hold a meeting with participants from Europe, North America, and East Asia / Australia, without some of them having to participate in the middle of the night. Adding other time zones obviously makes things even worse.
    • Is this really specific for remote meetings? If you have to fly if for a meeting in place with a large different time zone you will be severely jet lagged. Ainali (talk) 07:36, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Connection quality: Not everybody enjoys broadband connection of the same standard we have in Europe / North America, and currently the network is generally slow.
  • Off-talk participation: If this is really a meeting with pre-defined scope and participants, it is fine, but for conferences people also often go to spontaneously establish new collaboration and contacts, which is difficult to do online.

From Geert Van Pamel (WMBE) (talk) 09:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC) -

  • Technology: people have to learn (and sometims install a client for) different platforms (let us standardise?)
  • Open source solutions often are reliable, less performant, and do not scale
  • Equipment: people are using different types of equipment - (simple) smartphones, laptops with large flatscreens, headset and microphone, or special remote meeting room equipment - resulting in different experiences
  • Voice quality: can be really bad with a lot of jitter and distortion
  • Knowledge of English: leading to nonunderstanding, misunderstanding, and conflicts; further reducing the effectiveness of such online meetings
    • Maybe we need to split up certain meetings by language?
    • Possibilty for Chapters and User groups? => they require access to online conference tools to setup such meetings
  • Accessibility: not everybody can attend the meeting; it could be good to (centrally) record and then distribute the video
  • No social contact: people cannot talk 1:1 at the conference (no coffee breaks...)
    • Frequently I get to know useful tools just by talking a couple of minutes with another participant
  • Difficult to find new contacts amongst participants (related to previous point)
  • Accidental interruptions Can take various forms: malicious (e.g. Zoombombing); household interruptions (classic example); distracting or inappropriate content in background (passwords stuck on wall behind participant, other personal material); user mistakenly sharing wrong computer screen with participants (by way of example I recently noticed one event event host had been browsing through my own Wikimedia Commons image uploads when they flicked through all their open tabs to find the right page to share with participants. Not an issue for me - but it could so easily have been a very different page!) Nick Moyes (talk) 10:49, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Positive features of video conferences[edit]

From Geert Van Pamel (WMBE) (talk) 09:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC) -

  • Cost effective
    • You do not need to travel (cost effective, time effective)
    • No need for a conference venue (no costs, no catering, no hotel, no travel, no administration)
  • A video recording can document the meeting for future reference
  • A video editing of the session can be produced to show the headlines
  • Easy exchanging of information via chat (URLs, small comments)
  • Hand raise allows to request the microphone without disturbing the others
  • Can easily organise (multiple) continent-based sessions (by time zones)
    • Possibilty for Chapters and User groups? => they require access to online conference tools to setup such meetings

Further thoughts from Nick Moyes (talk) 11:44, 6 April 2020 (UTC) -

  • Can have more participants and greateraudience reach than a real-world meeting (both in audience numbers and geographic reach)
  • Not all wikimedia contributors are socially adept, or comfortable attending meetings; video conference lurking (VCL) may empower or encourage such editors
  • VCL aids familiarity, making attending a subsequent real-world meeting less daunting.
  • VCL (assuming video is hidden) can maintain participant anonymity - a principle we hold dear on Wikipedia.
  • Video conferencing requires less commitment to participate, time and (in most cases) cost. Video chat is a medium already familiar to younger people; use of online video conferencing as a learning aid may draw in new and younger audiences.

Testing Mumble[edit]

Hello, I have looked through the list of tools and I think that Mumble is a interesting free software for talking with other people from the home. This is a link to a German Server for Mumble. [1] Can someone please check if it is a good thing or what for risks are when using Mumble. I think this is a good thing but I havent tested it already and dont know much about security. I am interested in testing it and if someone else is also interested in testing it please let me know then we can talk together. --Hogü-456 (talk) 16:18, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikimedia Hackathon goes remote[edit]

As detailed here. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 18:31, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Jitsi[edit]

Hi,

The world of online communication is quickly evolving: it mght be good to have a clear date stamp on the information on this page, especially for the limitations of the apps mentioned.

Jitsi, for instance, doesn't have to be hosted on your own server per se. It is free for all, no registration needed, easy access. It reminds me of IRC: you just created the link and boom: every one can join. Next level is protecting the call with a password and then next level is hosting it on your own server.

Servers of Jitsi are in America, but at the moment there are several Dutch free knowledge/open source institutes that let you use their servers to host [2], so European privacy laws apply.

WMNL is using Jitsi at the moment for their online meetings and workshops. Ciell (talk) 10:56, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Nice to hear about WMNL using Jitsi, please add to FLOSS-Exchange. WMIT has been using it for a long while with great success.
The main instance meet.jit.si is ok and is nowadays served from AWS instances in Ireland too. It is very overloaded at times, though: that's where having your own instance is an advantage, because you can monitor and configure it as needed. There are many other instances too: https://framatalk.org/accueil/en/info/ . For Italian users it's sometimes better to use an instance which does less (lower resolution, less simultaneous video streams allowed), because often in Italy the users have very poor computers and connections, easily overwhelmed is a server throws 5 or 10 720p video streams at them.
FSF also had good success using Jitsi to livestream a conference (LibrePlanet), although I'd say that's not its main strength. https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/how-to-livestream-a-conference-in-just-under-a-week Nemo 18:09, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
You should also know that progress is being made for a WMF-hosted Jitsi (se link to the right). Ainali (talk) 19:42, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
I commented on Phabricator and elsewhere back then but forgot to link from here: Wikimedia Meet. Nemo 11:16, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Learning from the crisis: empower civil society organisations![edit]

Hi, why not try well-proven free-open-source tools like

You might also take a look at https://digitalezivilgesellschaft.org/en/

--Mr N (talk) 21:07, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

See my link in the section above about a WMF hosted Jitsi. Ainali (talk) 12:48, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support. Suggest implementation now----> jitsi.wikimedia.org BoldLuis (talk) 09:32, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Schedule[edit]

Is there a general schedule of Wikimedia events to which the public, or all editors, or those who are interested in a particular topic, are invited? Jim.henderson (talk) 22:57, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Well, there are Events and Meetup, but a good calendar, easy to filter for your region and/or language is something that we are missing. Ainali (talk) 12:30, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Template[edit]

{{online}} or derivative specific for Wikimania, can be used for remote events. BoldLuis (talk) 09:31, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Documentation template for remote events organizers[edit]

Hello all,

I've been working on a subpage of the Wikiproject, /Documentation, that encourages remote event organizers to document their event. People can easily create a subpage that uses this template (edit mode show you more information and advice), and existing pages are added to a category and listed on the Documentation page.

The goal of this page is to encourage organizers to document their events, in order to share knowledge across the Wikimedia movement, to highlight all the cool events that are already happening, and to inspire people who would like to start a remote event but need more information. I hope it will also help organizers get in touch with each other and support each other.

This is still a work in progress, and I would be happy to have your feedback on the page! If you're organizing a remote event, I'd love to see it documented, and to have your feedback on the process.

I'm also welcoming any idea to make the Documentation page more visible on the main page of the Wikiproject. Cheers, Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 19:06, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Wow that's a awsom idea ! EdH620 (talk) 16:25, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Announces section?[edit]

I suggest moving this section to a subpage, or even just move all announces to Events calendar. It seems like a bad idea trying to have both pages updated, especially when the latter could be transcluded here if want to. But I am not even sure it makes sense having such announcements here, unless they are on topic and not just "on medium". People signing up here are probably interested in moving remote participation in general forward, not in joining every remote event. Ainali (talk) 20:35, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

HOPIN.TO [proprietary] [service] no reviews or Wikipage (from CreativeComons festival)[edit]

I just made first entries about app.HOPIN.TO, which has many issues, but at least innovates a bit dull interface structures of zooms, jitsi and others to cater to festivals and conferences. Please help map info https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q100977865 and experiences... Zblace (talk) 05:49, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Anyone experienced with OBS...[edit]

...Open Broadcaster Software seems to be good for centralized studio-like setup. Zblace (talk) 16:13, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

It is, I have used it a bit. However, it has quite some learning threshold and takes some work to customize. Unless you are broadcasting on your own, you also need a separate solution to do video conferencing in and a way to bring that into the software. But once you have learned it and set it up, it is quite powerful. Ainali talkcontributions 19:38, 21 November 2020 (UTC)