On Aug 17, 2013, at 7:05 AM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
> I don't agree with charging remote attendees until after > it works for them and after successful remote participation > becomes somewhat disruptive to the f2f participants. We have > so far to go before we get there, that discussion of how, what, > who or why to charge is mostly silly distraction. I agree. My proposal for how/what/where to get more revenue (and not from remote participants) was only in case we actually need it to pay for enhancing remote participation. It's not clear we have such a need any time soon, but I was only trying to provide an alternative model to charging remote participants. -hadriel
