Thanks to John et al for complaining, because otherwise I wouldn't
have known until I tried to connect to Meetecho that remote registration
was needed. I mean, why would I bother to read a routine message about
remote participation details more than half an hour in advance?
Also, when you do register, why does it *require* your postal address and
telephone number, which have no relevance or value? (I can see why they
are needed for physical attendees.)
And why does the confirmation email have a bunch of text starting thus:
"You can pay the registration fee on site..."?
Regards
Brian
On 01/04/2016 07:29, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 16:37 -0800 Melinda Shore
<melinda(_dot_)shore(_at_)nomountain(_dot_)net> wrote:
On 3/30/16 12:22 PM, IETF Secretariat wrote:
1. Individuals are required to register for the meeting to
observe or participate via Meetecho.
I'm not sure I understand this correctly. Does this mean
that somebody is going to have to register after the meeting
to be able to watch archived recordings? That doesn't
seem correct. If it's not correct, why does someone have
to register to passively watch a session? Will the standalone
audio streams still be available during sessions?
See separate, related, note, but add to Melinda's questions:
A registration requirement for remote participants is a major
policy change and one for people who merely want to passively
observe is something I believe the community has several times
concluded is inappropriate given privacy, etc., concerns. So,
who made this decision and how? Unless the answer involves a
community discussion and Last Call or equivalent process that I
missed (and apparently Melinda did too), if the answer to "who
decided" involves anyone in the IETF Leadership, would they
please offer to resign?
If it isn't clear, despite advocating for remote participant
registration for years (and being clearly in the rough), I think
this way of handling and announcing the decision is outrageous.
john
.