A: I mean , not not the year not the year
F: It 's the age question again .
D: Your mother 's maiden name mother 's maiden name
B: Oh , I see .
B: Then , you don't hafta ask the age .
B: Yeah .
A: not the year but just their birthday .
C: Not the year .
A: I don't know ,
A: what are the chances of people having the same name .
D: social security number ,
F: Yeah , that 's right .
F: And a bank where you frequent .
F: Yeah .
E: PIN .
A: They B: Social social security number .
C: The PIN !
D: So , although the email email will change , I think that 's a good way of doing it .
F: Yeah .
D: We 'll be able to backtrack from email .
F: I like that .
F: I never thought of that as an identifier .
F: That makes sense .
D: Um , and then the other thing I was thinking about and it probably wouldn't be on the digits form ,
D: but it it is something that some form about the individual meeting .
F: Yeah .
D: Now , the problem I have with that is I don't know who would be filling it out .
F: Well , that I think , someone internal to the meeting could do after the fact .
F: And this would and and we discussed this ,
F: this is with reference to like the DTD ,
F: what you would put in the DTD that 's meeting - specific .
F: So . And it could be something like , " oh by the way , the guy giving the presentation today is the student of the professor who you know ,
F: whatever " .
F: So , speaker A is his professor and they and he 's preparing for his quals or some such thing like that .
F: Or it could be you know , " so - and - so and so - and - so are married " .
C: Hmm .
D: Just to pick up an arbitrary an <comment> example .
C: So - and - so and so F: We this wouldn't be relevant all the time
F: but you know , if there 's a big discussion on you know , the the um , best way to move house , then and these people are talking a whole lot , then it might be interesting information to say oh by the way they 're married , or F: I I don't mean , uh , you know .
D: Right .
D: So th so the sorts of questions I had were one Who 's gonna fill it out , and who 's gonna take responsibility for filling it out in each meeting ,
D: I mean , will we re will we require it .
F: I would tend to leave that e spontaneous ,
F: I think that e at the stage of uh Uh , sc scanning the transcripts after they 've been produced by by our  by IBM , At that point , I think that some of these dynamics will appear to be important ,
D: Mm - hmm .
D: Mm - hmm .
F: and you could you could spend a lot of time enumerating all the different relationships that people have .
D: And that was my other question , which is um what sort of information do we want to record ?
F: Yeah .
D: I mean , so I think pairwise relationships are pretty easy .
F: Mm - hmm .
D: You know , source , destination , relation .
D: Are there other sorts of things that might we might want to record ?
F: Well , I ju I was just thinking , with reference to uh , things that have that bear on the content or the status relations , would be the things F: Without being exhaustive , by any means ,
F: but just like I said , if there 's a k a certain topic that comes up in the meeting , and  that knowing their relationship will clarify it , or if there 's a certain dynamic that comes up F: So , I mean , a person is asked a whole bunch of questions , more than you 'd usually think they 'd be asked ,
F: and it turns out it 's because he 's being prepared for a job interview or something like that , then it 's useful to know that that relationship .
D: Right .
D: I think that fits in well with the whole meeting map mapping meetings concept is that 's another way of looking at looking at it .
F: But , not to be exhaustive .
F: Interesting .
D: So , are there anything other than pairwise ?
F: Oh , well yeah , you could have people who are all part of the same football league , or uh or chess club , or D: Oh yeah , OK .
A: So thi Isn't this an open - ended , like basically a notes column ?
A: I mean you can imagine wanting you should be able always to attach some notes to D: Yes , shirt certainly .
A: is this the the place where we would do that , or is there another place .
D: I 've been thi I it seems to be that there is We could attach more structure if we wanted to .
D: Especially because a lot of these relationships are pairwise power relationships .
B: I Maybe I was missing something maybe ,
B: but I mean this is something one would try to infer ,
B: but how do how would you How would you freeze that information about what , uh ,
B: I mean , we already have these things about someone 's a professor and someone 's a student , or something ,
B: but would you would you Some person would be writing OK this person was leading the meeting and that was or or F: Mm - hmm .
B: is that what you mean , or B: What what what uh ,
D: Um , just as an example , it would be , " Source , Adam Janin " , " Destination , Morgan " , " Relationship , Advisor " .
B: Oh , so you 're just putting preexisting relationships that are
D: that are relevant .
A: I think that starts to There 's definitely some clear cases ,
B: I see .
A: but there are a lot of gray areas , where the context happens just in that meeting ,
B: yeah .
D: Yep .
A: or ,
A: I mean , where you don't wanna sort of have to make a distinction between a pre - existing relationship , or
B: Yeah , I m
F: Well , realize , w this was the idea was that this would be meeting specific .
F: Otherwise , they would it would be possible to have a higher level thing .
A: But I mean , there are some that generalize over many meetings and there are some that don't , and there are some things that happen in between meetings ,
B: Right , but that example was not F: That 's true . That 's true .
D: Right , so my example was not a good one , because that 's B: Yeah .
B: So , I mean , for today , for instance ,
A: and B: this is the second meeting recorded today .
B: The first meeting was a was a front - end meeting ,
B: and in that one , the basic form of that was uh , I was the leader ,
B: and I was saying uh , " what are the results you 've gotten in the last week ? "
B: And they were and uh one person was sort of taking the lead , in describing what the results were ,
B: and then uh , Chuck was taking the role of saying , " well , what did you mean by that ? " ,
B: so he was sort of like the out s semi - outsider , asking curiosity questions .
B: And then it would come back to me with saying " well , you know , you showed me that but you know , I think you should do this in the future , "
B: so it was very much sort of " Leader " and and and and " Led " sort of relationship .
B: And um the guy I was primarily doing this with uh is is a visiting researcher , uh , in this l meeting , uh , you are my graduate student ,
B: but uh it 's not taking that kind of role at all ,
B: right ?
D: Right .
B: You 're you 're you 're actually leading the meeting for the most part , most of this meeting ,
D: Well , it 's just cuz it 's my turn .
B: so it 's B: Yeah , well , whatever .
B: So Uh Yeah , so I I don't know ,
B: so you 're suggesting A: I think this one needs to be open - ended ,
A: completely open - ended ,
A: and the only concern I would have is if there 's something we wanna be able to say and we can't put it in that field .
F: Well , the there 's @ @ I mean .
F: I g you You 're the expert on the D T
D: Well , the D T Ds mean we can do whatever however we want it .
F: but F: Yeah .
D: But what I what I was thinking uh the reason that I didn't want to make it completely open - ended is that it does seems like there is some structure which is common .
D: Especially with these pairwise ones , where you can describe them and pairwise .
A: So you mean like D: And you might want a tool that used that information .
A: Is there a way that we can add keywords or sub
A: I don't know what you would call them , but little labels for things that we decide are useful things to have
D: Sure , absolutely .
A: but You know , as long as we have this one place where it can all be stored , then we 're fine , I think .
B: Right , cuz it seems like it 's sort of a A: and those 'll probably occur I mean , to us , we 'll think of a few of them , some other researcher will think of some totally different keyword .
D: Right .
B: Exactly .
B: It 's sort of a research question , you you 're analyzing the meeting and you 're deciding , " ah , there 's this kind of structure to it . "
A: Y Yeah , it 's it 's it 's gonna change B: Yeah .
A: It 's gonna change ,
C: Yeah .
A: and maybe we wanna regroup things under different labels later ,
C: Interesting .
A: if we figure out that these pairwise things are D: Right <comment> Well I think <comment> being being in a common organization was one I hadn't thought of , that F: Well D: So you 're football league was a good one .
D: So the ones I 've been thinking of are all sort of uh , power , responsibility .
D: I guess husband - wife is yet another one .
F: And so , you know , in discourse analysis you get things like @ @ the role .
D: Ach !
F: You have you have a role in relationships and it has to do with your negotiating your how you 're perceived and how y and how the other @ @ D: Hmm .
C: Role , yeah .
C: Yeah .
F: You know , and so there are various things you negotiate .
F: And I 'm I 'm wondering if we might be able to do it s in sort of a loose way , but e with by having a searchable field like " role "
F: and then you know " within this context this person has the following roles " , and it could be very loose ,
D: Mm - hmm .
C: Yeah .
F: but then it would be possible to do something as simple as a grep across a database
F: and if you 're interested in you know which which which ones this person serves as an advisor in and versus you know a l uh s uh whatever , a leader , speaker , whatever , you could just grep for " role " and and you know , some some particular value .
D: Mm - hmm .
B: So it sounds like having the facility is great ,
C: Mm - hmm .