[governance] Virtual Participation - It doesn't have to be complex to work well.

[Robert Guerra]

Kieren:

Using technology for virtual participation isn't as complex as you  
make it seem.

Suffice it to say that there are a variety of different tools and  
methods that can be used to help involve a virtual audience into a  
physical meeting. My experience has been that though bandwidth is  
important, it isn't the only factor. The setup and format of the  
physical meeting also is a key factor. Video though visually  
appearing doesn't necessarily add much. A good audio stream is at  
times sufficient .  For example, a teleconference combined with  
interactive tools can perhaps suffice.

In the ICANN context, a simple solution would to place an audio  
transcript of the meeting online. As the meetings are streamed  
anyway, I don't think recording them would add any additional work.  
The audio would have to be saved - that could either be done on the  
ICANN site, or preferably on archive.org . With an online archive   
individual users, the private sector, researchers, govts and others  
could thus have a way to access the discussion if one missed a  
particular meeting, or didn't catch part of the discussion on the  
stream.

The Tunis phase WSIS meetings and well as the  IGF meeting in Athens  
are online. If they can do it, then surely ICANN can do the same.

I'd be happy to follow-up with you the experience here in Canada as  
well as novel approaches being using by the NGO sector to address the  
issue of bringing people to a meeting remotely.


regards,

Robert
---
Robert Guerra <rguerra at privaterra.org>
Managing Director, Privaterra
Tel +1 416 893 0377



On 16-May-07, at 4:09 AM, Kieren McCarthy wrote:
>> ICANN meetings as well as those of the IGF have long streamed video
>> and/or audio  - allowing those not present to listen in, however
>> virtually nothing has been done to allow the virtual audience to
>> engage the physical meeting. Panels and/or sessions that include
>> virtual participants should be tried using well known, and well
>> tested technologies.
>
>
>
> I agree, but what are these technologies you're referring to?
>
> Marratech doesn't appear to scale well - more than five people and  
> there are
> issues. And it needs heavy bandwidth.
>
> Streaming technologies are expensive and complex and don't provide
> sufficient interaction. Chatrooms are good for chat but for some  
> reason
> don't stretch over into deliberation. Ad hoc systems have an  
> extraordinary
> habit of falling over.
>
> Real-time interaction remains extremely difficult to achieve  
> because it
> requires people to be able to hear all that happens - something  
> that is a
> consistent problem - because the disconnect is still physically  
> there. Also
> because it is difficult for a physical presence (an arm raised, a  
> nod to the
> chair) to be reproduced effectively online. And because a chair has
> tremendous difficulty following things offline and online at the  
> same time.
> And so on.
>
> Is David Allen on this list? He has much more experience than I do  
> in these
> matters.
>
> But very far from saying this is not possible, I am thoroughly  
> committed to
> find practical solutions to this issue of effective remote  
> participation.
>
> If you could provide a list of software you think might be useful  
> in this
> area, I *guarantee* you that they will be put through proper  
> testing and any
> that survive real-world scenarios will be pushed for use both  
> within the IGF
> and ICANN contexts.
>
>
>
>
> Kieren
>
>
>
>
>



____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance