Ray,
Please read my response to Stephen. I didn't at all suggest what he seems to have interpreted me
to have done.
Regards,
Mary.
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 3:36 PM, Ray Pelletier <rpelletier@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
+1
Ray
> On Feb 14, 2015, at 4:15 PM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 14/02/15 18:21, Mary Barnes wrote:
>> And, actually this is already happening with Meetecho.
>
> I think we ought forget about charging for remote attendance until
> remote attendance is much better. Remotely attending IETF-91 via
> meetecho was a good bit better than I expected but is nowhere near
> the point where we could charge. Let's make it work first, and then
> see how that affects attendance and then figure out charging models
> and not try do that backwards by starting to discuss charging models
> for something that doesn't yet exist.
>
> S.
>