W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

RE: Recording teleconferences?

From: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 13:35:13 -0700 (PDT)
To: "'Sam Ruby'" <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Cc: "'Anne van Kesteren'" <annevk@opera.com>, "'Vicki Stanton'" <vicki.stanton@gmail.com>, <public-html@w3.org>, "'Wai-Ig'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, "'Jonas Sicking'" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "'Matt May'" <mattmay@adobe.com>, "'Laura Carlson'" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, "'Dan Connolly'" <connolly@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00b601ca1de7$e1372960$a3a57c20$@edu>
Sam Ruby wrote:

>> That we must still have this discussion with highly intelligent people
>> in
>> 2009 is extremely sad.
>
> John,
> please reread the above sentence and tell me if that is typical of the
> way you talk when you are face to face with an individual, or is closer
> to the type of polemics that you would place into a speech addressed to
> an "audience".

I actually turned to a colleague yesterday and said, "I can't believe we are 
still having this discussion...", so yes Sam, I would - if I were sitting 
across a coffee table from Anne, I would likely say something very similar 
as well.  I am truly astonished (and deeply saddened) that we are debating a 
person's right to access to public data, and that it is being held up as a 
barrier to progress - all for the cost of an $80.00 transcript.  Instead of 
people writing to ask "how" can we overcome this 'problem', we instead get 
notes asking 'why' and stating:

"... In not so many words [it was stated that if things actually became 
required] it would just mean that a bunch of data would get lost." (Anne van 
Kesteren)

"... However, if creating a transcript is not possible for financial 
reasons, then that reduces our options to either publish recordings without 
transcript, or publish nothing. Out of those two options I think publish 
recordings is better." (Jonas Sicking)

I am sorry if what I said is seen as being polemic, but it is and was said 
with genuine sincerity on my part - it *is* sad that neither of those two 
authors see the 'wrongness" of what they suggested (and that many others 
agree with them).

>
> Let me remind people that last month we had a discussion[1] when *gasp*
> it was noticed that the editor was routinely having discussions which
> not only weren't transcribed, they not only weren't recorded, they
> weren't even public.
>
> I will make a confession.  I, too, have had discussions that weren't
> transcribed, recorded, or public.  And I will further confess that I
> found some of them to be useful.

I think here you are missing the point.  Private conversations are just 
that, private.  They may in fact affect "business" as we are conducting it 
here, but that does not grant them the status of 'always public'.

Publishing the record of a publicly held teleconference however is a 
different matter.  The minutes from that teleconference are a matter of 
public record, as is the IRC transcript.  Both of those 'recordings' are 
equally available to all, in an equitable fashion. If, in the interest of 
better public comprehension, an audio recording is made publicly available, 
then it too should be made in an equitable way - which today means that we 
should provide a transcript.  In a global, public organization such as W3C, 
we should be beyond having that debate, yet here we are, wondering where the 
next $80.00 will be coming from and debating if we *really* must have the 
transcript before posting an audio recording.

And I can't be sad about that?

>
> I plan to be accessible.  I don't mean to be in the narrow technical
> sense that that word as it is used in the W3C, I mean that in the wider
> sense of being approachable and reachable.

...and you have already proven that to me in person.  It is not a question 
of access to the process, it is a question of access to the data.  Sam, 
please re-read Vicki's contribution to this thread - she said it in a much 
more eloquent way than I can, although I will quote her:

"This difficulty, ... may not seem like a big deal to many of the WG 
members, but it's isolating and frustrating in the extreme for intelligent 
professionals who feel they have a lot to offer - if they could just know 
what's going on!"

[ http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/0777.html ]

>
> I encourage people to copy www-archive or public-html when they send
> email to me.  If people wish to record my conversations and share them
> with others, all I ask is that people let everybody know what they are
> doing up front.  Similarly, I encourage people to take and publish
> transcripts.

Me too.

And I've put my name on the bottom line - I will pay for the first 
transcript of a weekly recorded teleconference to get the ball rolling, 
because I also believe that actions speak much louder than words.

And if that makes me Polemic, then I will add that to the list of attributes 
I have already been saddled with.

JF
Received on Saturday, 15 August 2009 20:35:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 10 October 2014 16:24:50 UTC