Re: [ga] remote participation

["Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu>]

On Sun, 18 Feb 2001, Alexander Svensson wrote:

> However, the proposal that the in-person participants take
> part in the meeting as remote participants seems to take 
> away all the advantages of physical meetings; why should 
> there be physical meetings after all? The local community 

Good question.  Given that this is a global internet body, one might well
ask.

> may be one aspect (which I obviously cannot judge), but 
> I take it that face-to-face communication generally still 
> gets more work done. 
> 

It may make sense for the BOARD to be f2f, but that doesn't mean that rich
supplicants should have an edge over less wealthy ones.

> The real problem is the GA list and its bad signal-noise 
> ratio.  If the online GA can do everything the in-person 

I respectfully disagree.  An even larger problem is that repeat f2f
players -- those who are paid to attend sessions as lobbyists, primarily
-- have a huge edge.


-- 
		Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                       -->It's cool here.<--

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html