Re: [council] Draft minutes from today NC telecon October 5th,1999

[Richard Lindsay <richard@interq.ad.jp>]

Theresa,

Thanks for confirming my logic.

Andrew, would it be possible to provide an estimate (approximate is
OK) about what the costs of each function are per hour.  For example:

Teleconference xx$$ per hour per port
Webcasting xx$$ per hour per broadcast (or per additional broadcast.)

Thus I think it would be easier to estimate what costs might be,
to explain why we believe it would be unreasonable to offer web
casting to the constituency meetings, AND perhaps to induce
us to finish meetings on time :-)

Regards,
Richard

PS by the way I think the ICANN estimates of $8,000 are entirely
reasonable.  This stuff is not cheap - be thankful this year there
are no meetings in Japan - watch out for costs next year!

Theresa Swinehart wrote:

> Richard - yes, that's my understanding as well. That for purposes of
> transparency, remote participation, webcasting is needed. If I recall the
> general assembly discussion based on a note I sent regarding this issue
> prior to Santiago meeting correctly, sense was that webcasting was important
> but the GA did not have ideas of how to pay for it. It's unclear to me how
> much it is used during the meeting, or whether recording the meetings and
> making that available would also work in the long run - that may be useful
> to find out the extent of use so far. (Don't get me wrong, I don't have a
> problem webcasting (cost issue aside), but perhaps alternatives would also
> be functional if they fulfill the purposes adequately).