Re: Thinking laterally

Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> Fri, 27 February 2015 18:10 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A7D1A90DD for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 10:10:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.277
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tV8d_13g--zk for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 10:10:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-la0-x233.google.com (mail-la0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60EE21A873E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 10:10:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by labgd6 with SMTP id gd6so19271377lab.8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 10:10:24 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=wk8jZ30xxZRf6Pn+hY9YM++FOI5apS64iKZUQieDdpA=; b=oN60tWj1vZ0RQqLg5eli0cxH7CCLnFilr0I9B0sy7Jqnrf8H1c1nOZiDfy0mHZDUYr ZyhqTyyaqcwBU3YGCGq6FcrVs3V4prsoPjM0ntaFmiaRxhfpzx9O4tyLHas3YRNBrhx4 4H06q8xK0tIl7Rsr954AGjgf62Qd599vRTufKbYEDr+BVrn1Thmc+NtkqxRvpK/p945k lNfhFlEjV5YQ54wgXgetvu/1hmiG/b98rwqUf6kqVW76XiYeDkKoMGdRe84hrMwV3joI MSh8CExBSkmcw9Elo+qkUbCpXsdB+cGc+yF2nuR65qg28YoBrDUBD6+HaqTT39aXvIxS VdUg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.4.136 with SMTP id k8mr13936761lak.103.1425060624863; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 10:10:24 -0800 (PST)
Sender: hallam@gmail.com
Received: by 10.113.3.165 with HTTP; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 10:10:24 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CABmDk8=9FU39pFFwyAAvOGoyq3C7=BQbG4QZAW-SXy=E44Bw4w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMm+LwiLLG8B9vni8moVW3-zufiZdBsPym3vOHDnZ3msGwWyYQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABmDk8=9FU39pFFwyAAvOGoyq3C7=BQbG4QZAW-SXy=E44Bw4w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 13:10:24 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0VaXJN0nHhwlrKXrXrn-QGh3YzY
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwgmnQB5Y4J=L1BRTxRi5xP_ZwEjgb9op_R+vE7Tu9HUHg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Thinking laterally
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
To: Mary Barnes <mary.h.barnes@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d119a541995051015c891
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/uF0x398xkn1M7m4lF-CvpRVvJSo>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 18:10:28 -0000

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Mary Barnes <mary.h.barnes@gmail.com>
wrote:

> We already have video for sessions that use Meetecho.  While not perfect,
> it's a great way to participate remotely.   And, it uses protocols that we
> have developed and are developing in IETF.
>
> Hopefully, meeting minutes for all the sessions that use Meetcho have
> links to the recordings.  If not, you can find them here:
> http://www.ietf.org/meeting/91/remote-participation.html#Meetecho
> I've gone back to the recordings when prepare meeting minutes.
>
> Just as a note, I am not commenting either way on the charging thing.  I
> see the obvious advantage but I also think there's a number of
> disadvantages.  Per my comment earlier about meeting minutes, wouldn't it
> be a real turnoff if someone was wanting to catch-up with a WG, but had to
> pay to see the corresponding video recording from a meeting?
>
> Regards,
> Mary.
>
>
The idea was to provide a way for me as a remote participant to guarantee
that the video is there.

I was not suggesting paywalling it. More a sponsorship sort of model. If I
am attending a session remotely and it is core to my work I am going to
kick in the cash in case nobody else does.

I don't want it paywalled even if I am paying though.