I like Aaron's suggestion to update the web with important information about a meeting. There is a lot of mail on the list and that could be a useful way to communicate updates, etc.
Best regards, Kathleen Sent from my iPhone On Jul 25, 2013, at 12:12 AM, "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 25/07/2013 11:27, Scott Brim wrote: >> Brian: yes but non-registered thus non-ifentifiable subscribers, spammers >> etc don't. > > We're talking about a list with a useful lifetime of perhaps 3 weeks. > I really don't think spam is a big issue. Trolls might be, but they > would be *our* trolls ;-) > > Anyway - as John Klensin said, we should come up with a reasonably > complete and welcoming set of info and facilities for the remotes. > That may well include pro forma registration. > > Brian > >> On Jul 24, 2013 3:56 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On 25/07/2013 05:01, Scott Brim wrote: >>>> The point of having a separate list for participants was to avoid >>>> spamming the ietf list. >>>> >>>> It can be open to everyone to subscribe to, since anyone can see the >>>> archives, HOWEVER I recommend that only registered participants be >>>> allowed to post. >>> Ahem. Either remote participants are allowed to post, or they need >>> a list of their own. I would envisage a fair amount of chatter about >>> specific remote-participation issues, like "this new codec isn't >>> working for me, is it OK for anyone else using <browser version> on >>> <operating system version>?" >>> >>> Brian >
