Re: Recording teleconferences?

At 19:10  +0200 15/08/09, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 11:42:21 +0200, Vicki Stanton 
><vicki.stanton@gmail.com> wrote:
>>  I hope the transcript issue doesn't get in the way of the argument
>>  for/against recording the teleconferences. It does seem to me,
>>  however, that we should be enthusiastically leading the way, not be
>>  dragged kicking and screaming into compliance with W3C policy.
>
>Right, the problem from my point of view is that we are already 
>having inaccessible meetings. Although it is said that meetings are 
>not required to be attended, at least one of the chairs obviously 
>considers they are useful and is encouraging more people to attend. 
>And if you cannot attend all you have is minutes which are generally 
>crappy or some kind of summary on a blog, such as
>
>http://intertwingly.net/blog/2009/08/12/Mountain-Mohammed-Mohammed-Mountain-Please-Talk#c1250189423
>
>and you hope it is accurate.

We could improve the situation without much trouble.

If you make a significant point (in your assessment) and want to be 
sure it's recorded accurately, type it into IRC yourself.  Too many 
people (like me) talk fast and assume the scribe is a professional 
court stenographer with a perfect phone line.

Encourage the scribe to 'just dump' as much transcript as they can 
fill in otherwise.

If people take the trouble to get on queue (q+) pay more attention to 
them than to random statements.

There are probably a few more ways we could get the transcript and 
minutes much better....


-- 
David Singer
Multimedia Standards, Apple Inc.