We go into details.
3.1 Preparing for public talks over the Internet
I'll give examples of what we can do.
3.1.1 Person 1 shares something like: "I have this thought. I want to discuss it. I'd try to become aware of what related benefits I seek."
They can try to talk about this with anyone, in their household, neighbourhood, etc. One usually has at least one interlocutor, e.g., a friend, or can find one in a public meeting.
When one has reason to seek a new interlocutor, one can ask Sol teams for some help. We can organise meetings in your favourite localities.
It is easier to organise OPT. You can suggest one now.
We help people discuss topics. Example: You share you want to talk about topic 1. We take note. When at least one other person is willing to discuss topic 1, we start a conversation with you and these other interested persons so that we schedule OPT with this topic.
The most effective plan is to manage related data well. Otherwise, one can feel like shouting into the void; an example: some people say that social media don't work.
One can ask us to be reactive or to be active, i.e. to look for people interested in topic 1.
One can enjoy useful moderation of telecommunication. We help participants get what they want. We try to agree with you on many things, e.g. on the structure of talks.
3.1.2 We choose the computer program with which we schedule the talks.
As this one, YouTrack, is really helpful, I share what we can do.
3.1.2.1 We list public talks here.
One can create, edit, discuss, sort, and search for, talks, as any other such items, even if it's not called a "talk".
One can enable / disable notifications about talks that meet certain criteria, e.g. they have a certain topic or are scheduled for certain times.
3.1.2.2 We can agree on each thing, e.g. the main topic. Once we do that, we can suggest when to have the next talk.
We can input each UTC as a comment, then use e.g. the thumbs-up reaction to vote. YouTrack counts these reactions.
3.1.2.3 The moderator fills the fields: Start, End, address
3.1.2.4 Now, that you know when we talk about what where, you can decide whether you participate.
To indicate that I participate:
3.1.2.4.1 I press the field "people".
YouTrack overlays a list of users.
3.1.2.4.2 I start typing my name.
YouTrack searches for my profile.
3.1.2.4.3 When I notice it, I select it.
YouTrack will notify me about everything that happens at that Web address.
To make this as useful as we like, we can add comments and fields, and link to other issues.
3.1.3 We choose the program that lets us talk.
examples:
Discord
Jitsi
3.2 Talking publicly over the Internet
3.2.1 We can agree on how we structure any talk.
3.2.1.1 Anyone could participate in any talk, e.g. thousands of people. As a number like that is unusual, we could say: up to 100.
As this is a talk and not a "listen", everyone should have the opportunity to talk.
We can try to estimate the minimal average number of minutes in which a speaker can feel that they have expressed at least one thing, that they are understood, and that they can build with at least one person a useful conversation with that topic. If it's 15 minutes, then maybe we'd reserve 1 hour for every 4 speakers.
3.2.1.2 It seems that at least some people want to express themselves freely at least sometimes. To meet this need, we can let one person speak for 1 hour or for 2 hours. You can ask for longer times.
3.2.1.3 Any participant is probable to want a break per hour, so we can have e.g. 10 minutes per hour with a slower pace.
It's useful to start with a "break": a warm-up chat or introductory talk.
3.2.1.4 I like it that LinkedIn lets people start 15 minutes earlier. One can also use other software to start early and prepare, e.g. by testing some hardware or software.
3.2.2 We agree on when we start related talks or conversations.
Example: At least 2 participants want to focus on a certain topic. They signal this on the event page.
3.2.2.1 One can create a YouTrack issue for this conversation and link it to the event page.
3.2.2.2 We can require that the program lets us start related talks (in "break-out rooms").
Programs that meet this requirement: Google Meet, Microsoft Teams, Whereby, Zoom
3.2.3 We agree on what is cast.
3.2.3.1 Sounds
3.2.3.1.1 Sometimes people appreciate brief interactions, e.g. laughter.
We could have the moderator turn each microphone on and off, as this can help a talk go well in general, but this wouldn't meet this requirement.
3.2.3.2 Images
3.2.3.2.1 One is free to use a camera when one likes.
I'd vote for software that lets people use a camera.
Programs that meet this requirement: Discord, Whereby, Zoom
3.2.4 We agree on data sources.
3.2.4.1 It's useful to be able to share something on one's screen.
It seems that this requirement does not reduce our options.
3.2.4.2 We can use software that can stream sounds and images from any of many Web sites simultaneously to all participants.
This enables a better experience than when a participant casts e.g. sounds received by their microphone from their loudspeakers.
3.2.5 We agree on how we make the talk available.
3.2.5.1 Are we going to broadcast our next talk using e.g. Google YouTube?
3.2.5.2 Are we going to record our next talk?
3.3 The relation between talking and writing
3.3.1 People usually talk and write over the Internet. We can keep a balance between these activities and link our conversations to the data about our talks.
3.3.1.1 One possible method is to use e.g. Tana to transcribe what we say.
If we use this method, we agree on how we manage these data. We agree on how we manage any data together.
3.3.1.2 We can have before a talk and after a talk conversations that are closely related to it.
We start from the top (!): communication
1.1 without tools
We spend time together.
1.2 with tools
1.2.1 over loudspeakers
This, too, can be seen as telecommunication.
1.2.2 telecommunication
1.2.2.1 mail
1.2.2.2 telephony
1.2.2.3 telecommunication over the Internet
Person 1 can write and talk to person 2 irrespective of the distance between them.
More than 5.44 billion people (6 billion by the end of 2025) spend an average of 6 hours and 35 minutes online each day. It seems that we spend up to a third of this time talking over the Internet. They say that we spend about as much time talking online and offline.
1.2.2.3.1 writing (typing)
1.2.2.3.2 talking
1.2.2.3.2.1 We communicate, e.g. we talk, mostly privately.
1.2.2.3.2.2 public talks
Time to OPT in?(!)
2.1 We can discuss the benefits of any kind of communication and focus on those of online public talks (OPT).
Ideally, one can express oneself freely at many moments, irrespective of who can witness that.
We can cooperate to make such moments possible more often.
It doesn't seem easy to state the benefits of communication, because communication is essential and influences our lives hugely.
2.1.1 Public communication helps people to coordinate and rebalance. It is related to traditional art, which people created when they gathered; art seems invaluable. It seems that our society fares well to the extent that we communicate publicly.
Public telecommunication might peak as soon as we become unable to make screens. Yet each person and each generation can try to build relationships and communicate (e.g. in public) more beneficially.
2.1.2 A good feeling or a useful idea can spread.
2.1.3 It has been stated that it is useful to publish human knowledge. It's one of the methods to keep any part of society (and nature) healthy.
2.1.4 People discuss often how they are going to manage resources. Even if we discuss separately managing the resources that are owned privately (by trading with one another) or those owned by a community (by choosing public servants or by providing public services), these areas are closely connected.
2.2 We can discuss the costs of any kind of communication and focus on those of OPT.
2.2.1 For instance because one fears some things sometimes, one can talk rather poorly or ineffectively; e.g. we're insincere.
We go into details.
3.1 Preparing for public talks over the Internet
I'll give examples of what we can do.
3.1.1 Person 1 shares something like: "I have this thought. I want to discuss it. I'd try to become aware of what related benefits I seek."
They can try to talk about this with anyone, in their household, neighbourhood, etc. One usually has at least one interlocutor, e.g., a friend, or can find one in a public meeting.
When one has reason to seek a new interlocutor, one can ask Sol teams for some help. We can organise meetings in your favourite localities.
It is easier to organise OPT. You can suggest one now.
We help people discuss topics. Example: You share you want to talk about topic 1. We take note. When at least one other person is willing to discuss topic 1, we start a conversation with you and these other interested persons so that we schedule OPT with this topic.
The most effective plan is to manage related data well. Otherwise, one can feel like shouting into the void; an example: some people say that social media don't work.
One can ask us to be reactive or to be active, i.e. to look for people interested in topic 1.
One can enjoy useful moderation of telecommunication. We help participants get what they want. We try to agree with you on many things, e.g. on the structure of talks.
3.1.2 We choose the computer program with which we schedule the talks.
As this one, YouTrack, is really helpful, I share what we can do.
3.1.2.1 We list public talks here.
One can create, edit, discuss, sort, and search for, talks, as any other such items, even if it's not called a "talk".
One can enable / disable notifications about talks that meet certain criteria, e.g. they have a certain topic or are scheduled for certain times.
3.1.2.2 We can agree on each thing, e.g. the main topic. Once we do that, we can suggest when to have the next talk.
We can input each UTC as a comment, then use e.g. the thumbs-up reaction to vote. YouTrack counts these reactions.
3.1.2.3 The moderator fills the fields: Start, End, address
3.1.2.4 Now, that you know when we talk about what where, you can decide whether you participate.
To indicate that I participate:
3.1.2.4.1 I press the field "people".
YouTrack overlays a list of users.
3.1.2.4.2 I start typing my name.
YouTrack searches for my profile.
3.1.2.4.3 When I notice it, I select it.
YouTrack will notify me about everything that happens at that Web address.
To make this as useful as we like, we can add comments and fields, and link to other issues.
3.1.3 We choose the program that lets us talk.
examples:
Discord
Jitsi
3.2 Talking publicly over the Internet
3.2.1 We can agree on how we structure any talk.
3.2.1.1 Anyone could participate in any talk, e.g. thousands of people. As a number like that is unusual, we could say: up to 100.
As this is a talk and not a "listen", everyone should have the opportunity to talk.
We can try to estimate the minimal average number of minutes in which a speaker can feel that they have expressed at least one thing, that they are understood, and that they can build with at least one person a useful conversation with that topic. If it's 15 minutes, then maybe we'd reserve 1 hour for every 4 speakers.
3.2.1.2 It seems that at least some people want to express themselves freely at least sometimes. To meet this need, we can let one person speak for 1 hour or for 2 hours. You can ask for longer times.
3.2.1.3 Any participant is probable to want a break per hour, so we can have e.g. 10 minutes per hour with a slower pace.
It's useful to start with a "break": a warm-up chat or introductory talk.
3.2.1.4 I like it that LinkedIn lets people start 15 minutes earlier. One can also use other software to start early and prepare, e.g. by testing some hardware or software.
3.2.2 We agree on when we start related talks or conversations.
Example: At least 2 participants want to focus on a certain topic. They signal this on the event page.
3.2.2.1 One can create a YouTrack issue for this conversation and link it to the event page.
3.2.2.2 We can require that the program lets us start related talks (in "break-out rooms").
Programs that meet this requirement: Google Meet, Microsoft Teams, Whereby, Zoom
3.2.3 We agree on what is cast.
3.2.3.1 Sounds
3.2.3.1.1 Sometimes people appreciate brief interactions, e.g. laughter.
We could have the moderator turn each microphone on and off, as this can help a talk go well in general, but this wouldn't meet this requirement.
3.2.3.2 Images
3.2.3.2.1 One is free to use a camera when one likes.
I'd vote for software that lets people use a camera.
Programs that meet this requirement: Discord, Whereby, Zoom
3.2.4 We agree on data sources.
3.2.4.1 It's useful to be able to share something on one's screen.
It seems that this requirement does not reduce our options.
3.2.4.2 We can use software that can stream sounds and images from any of many Web sites simultaneously to all participants.
This enables a better experience than when a participant casts e.g. sounds received by their microphone from their loudspeakers.
3.2.5 We agree on how we make the talk available.
3.2.5.1 Are we going to broadcast our next talk using e.g. Google YouTube?
3.2.5.2 Are we going to record our next talk?
3.3 The relation between talking and writing
3.3.1 People usually talk and write over the Internet. We can keep a balance between these activities and link our conversations to the data about our talks.
3.3.1.1 One possible method is to use e.g. Tana to transcribe what we say.
If we use this method, we agree on how we manage these data. We agree on how we manage any data together.
3.3.1.2 We can have before a talk and after a talk conversations that are closely related to it.
Event management
4.1 We can agree on who manages each of these activities.
4.2 Moderation
4.2.1 The moderator can be the event manager.
4.2.2 We can appoint a moderator.
4.2.2.1 We take turns.
One may skip one's turn.
4.2.2.2 We agree on how it's useful to moderate talks and on who can help us more with this.
4.2.3 Google Meet queues speakers.