Hi, In reading this thread several thoughts have come to mind: - for several years I have not been able to attend an IETF mtg in person, yet always join in some of the sessions remotely. Is our remote attendance recorded as well, or its it only in the chat archive? I have noticed that not all of us give our real names when we sign in (I generally do but that is beside the point.) This would also apply to those who are at the physical mtg but who time share between sessions. - when I used to come to the physical meetings, I often noticed people who came to the mtg who did not sign the blue / pink sheets. And does everyone who comes in late actually find the sheet and sign it? - does everyone sign their real name? do we know if anyone has ever signed the name of someone else? How often has Minnie Mouse attended an IETF WG mtg. - I thought the comment about taking pictures to record the identities of those who read documents was interesting. For those who are recognizable this its indeed a good record, but what about for others? Also a statement was made that no one could complain about this because of the note well - but that only references "written, audio and video records of meetings may be made and may be available to the public" - nothing about still photography. Perhaps the video feature of the phone should be used in the future. So it seems that the records are probably partial, and unreliable. They are also not verified. Are they really useful? In thinking about why such records are kept, I sort of understand the various IPR reasons, but wonder, whether given the unreliability of the information, it really would be accepted as evidence. Has ever ever been a case where these blue sheet records were accepted as evidence? If not, are there other good reasons for the blue sheets? I mean they are a quaint historical relic and that has value for any organization, but is there a function they reliably serve? avri Fernando Gont <fernando@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >On 04/24/2012 03:40 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>> * What about the case in which the same person must be in two >meetings >>> that overlap? (e.g., I've *presented* at overlapping meeting) What >>> should they do in that that case? Sign all the corresponding blue >>> sheets? Sign none? >> >> I think you should sign both; however, your name will be in the >minutes as >> a presenter, so your presence is part of the public record. > >What about folks that are interested in being present in the discussion >of documents in overlapping meetings? (e.g., one document being >rpesented by some folks at the beginning of one meeting, and some other >doc being presented at the end of some other meeting?). > >Thanks, >-- >Fernando Gont >e-mail: fernando@xxxxxxxxxxx || fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1