Adding to my own comments -
Beware of technological solutions that require software on the remote
user's end, or network communications.
Many employers have strict policies about what is allowed to be installed
on company computers.
Furthermore, some have draconian firewalls. For instance, my employer's
network blocks jabber. They used to block the streaming audio too. They
are likely to block anything "new" they have not officially approved.
I have to isolate myself from the company network, and use a separate
connection, to use jabber from the office.
Janet
ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org wrote on 08/16/2013 09:50:58 AM:
From: Janet P Gunn/USA/CSC@CSC
I agree with Hadriel (probably because we attend a lot of the same
WGs) that remote participants are not actively ignored.
The problem is that, with the time lag, and the need to type in your
comments in quickly, then relay them through the jabber scribe
A- the discussion has often moved on before your comment gets to the mic
B - your comment is necessarily short and, hopefully, to the point.
But if the audience doesn't "get" the point and misinterprets your
comment, you really don't get an opportunity to clarify.
C- you can't participate in a back and forth "conversation"
Of the remedies listed, only
audio input - the ability for remote participants to speak using
their own voice, when it's their turn at the 'mic'.
addresses that.
(When I drag myself out of bed at 2:30 AM for a remote meeting,
even if I have changed into clothes, I don't think I want
video input, where remote participants can be seen
as well as heard. )
Janet