[to no one in particular] Uhhh... I can't tell if you folks are being serious about this idea or not, but in case you are being serious... ISTM there's such a thing as too much technology being a bad thing. If you think technical glitches now-and-then cause issues with remote participants today, wait until physical participants have to deal with glitches in something like this. "KISS" isn't just a rock-band from the 70's, it's also a useful principle known to many today. If the problem is "we don't know who's speaking", then fix that problem. In WGs I go to, both the WG chairs and the jabber scribes regularly yell "NAME!" if someone forgets to say it. Unlike DNS Ops, this isn't rocket science. Besides, it's not a bad thing to make people get in mic lines, if for no other reason than to have a small barrier threshold for folks to decide it's worth it to say something.[1] -hadriel [1] yes, I recognize the irony in this statement, since I get up to the mic every 15 seconds and say inane things. We can't stop all people like me from wasting meeting time, we can just reduce the number of similar people wasting time. On Aug 6, 2013, at 3:15 PM, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Aug 6, 2013, at 11:27 AM, Dave Crocker <dhc@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> An entirely different approach would be to have all speakers make a 'reservation' into a single meetecho (or whatever) online queue, and then get called in order, whether local or remote and independent of what microphone they are at. This gets accurate identification into the online system, with the entry task distributed. > > I would not mind this system intensely, but bear in mind that it requires everybody to bring a mobile device of some sort that can be used to do this registration, and they will have to keep that device out and active during all meetings. If their battery dies, they can no longer participate, or will require exception handling. >