[to no one in particular]
Uhhh... I can't tell if you folks are being serious about this idea or not, but
in case you are being serious... ISTM there's such a thing as too much
technology being a bad thing. If you think technical glitches now-and-then
cause issues with remote participants today, wait until physical participants
have to deal with glitches in something like this. "KISS" isn't just a
rock-band from the 70's, it's also a useful principle known to many today.
If the problem is "we don't know who's speaking", then fix that problem. In
WGs I go to, both the WG chairs and the jabber scribes regularly yell "NAME!"
if someone forgets to say it. Unlike DNS Ops, this isn't rocket science.
Besides, it's not a bad thing to make people get in mic lines, if for no other
reason than to have a small barrier threshold for folks to decide it's worth it
to say something.[1]
-hadriel
[1] yes, I recognize the irony in this statement, since I get up to the mic
every 15 seconds and say inane things. We can't stop all people like me from
wasting meeting time, we can just reduce the number of similar people wasting
time.
On Aug 6, 2013, at 3:15 PM, Ted Lemon <Ted(_dot_)Lemon(_at_)nominum(_dot_)com>
wrote:
On Aug 6, 2013, at 11:27 AM, Dave Crocker <dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net> wrote:
An entirely different approach would be to have all speakers make a
'reservation' into a single meetecho (or whatever) online queue, and then
get called in order, whether local or remote and independent of what
microphone they are at. This gets accurate identification into the online
system, with the entry task distributed.
I would not mind this system intensely, but bear in mind that it requires
everybody to bring a mobile device of some sort that can be used to do this
registration, and they will have to keep that device out and active during
all meetings. If their battery dies, they can no longer participate, or
will require exception handling.