> In general I think 2) is most practical for now. I'd prefer > 3) since I think everyone can have headphones and listen in > to the main meeting and ask questions in IRC but having > someone volunteer to transcribe / summarize the meeting is a > huge commitment. I don't think meeting minutes would be an issue. I'm used to them for work meetings, others likely used to similar. Not a word for word dictation, just a summary of discussion points, decisions, action items. We don't need to go all Robert's Rules on this, but good meeting minutes are golden. Just have someone makes the notes summarizing the discussion into the irc channel. Those that had to step away from the meeting could catch up, but more importantly, it gives us a written record of a voice-based meeting. The other barrier to voice meetings that I don't think was mentioned was that it requires good spoken english, rather than just written english (and the ability to understand it). Having summaries written as the meeting progresses might help that. Lunch is far too short, Cheers - Michael
