Re: Efficient board meetings, revised

Bill Allombert writes ("Re: Efficient board meetings, revised"):
> On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 12:59:56PM -0400, David Graham - SPI Secretary wrote:
> > The practice of having guests state their name to the channel has been
> > abolished independant of this resolution in favour of the secretary
> > receiving the list over the course of the meeting by private messages.
>
> It was abolished as part as a previous resolution by Ian.
>
> I find the assumption that guests stating their names being the cause of
> some IRC meeting inefficiency being ludicrous at best and given the
> small number of guests attending meeting, being friendly to them cannot
> harm the organization.

The problem isn't having the guests state their names. The problem is
having the meeting held up for n minutes for no good reason. I don't
think this is a huge problem, but it seemed obviously daft to me and
since the meeting chair didn't do what I wanted putting it my
resolution and letting the board decide seemed sensible.

`Being friendly' to someone doesn't mean keeping a dozen or two people
waiting for them to type their name. It means making them feel
welcome and able to participate. One way to make them feel more
welcome, perhaps, would be to give them the ability to discuss what's
going on in the meeting without disrupting it. This is something
that's difficult to provide in meat-life, but quite easy to do with
IRC: there should be a companion unmoderated channel.

Ian.