On 15/05/2014 17:16, Dilwyn Jones wrote:
One thing I would appreciate from Quanta is if someone would be prepared to say a few words about electronic participation in meetings. I am not thinking in terms of the technical details, but more how it has turned out in practice.
I have participated in a Quanta committee meeting by speakerphone group call, and the AGM this year by a Skype group call.

The speakerphone meeting was less than perfect, because although those of us on phones could hear each other well, we could not hear some of those at the meeting itself. The committee agreed to look into obtaining a purpose made phone, which has more than one microphone to pick up those around the table a bit better, although I don't know if one was purchased or not.

The telephone conference call was via an 0845 dial-in. We were told to dial in about 5 minutes before the meeting started, which gave enough time to identify ourselves and make sure we could hear each other. This type of call can become difficult if several people talk across each other, so one person (e.g. Chairman) needs to be in charge and ensure people speak in turn and invite comments from those on a phone, as it is easier to catch Chairman's eye in the room if you want to speak - telephone guests potentially at a disadvantage, although in our case Sarah handled this very well.

The disadvantage with this is that it is after all an 0845 number based system, which would be more costly for anyone overseas.

For this year's AGM, we used the Skype group call system (audio only). Three of us (Lee Privett, Dave Park and myself) participated - there was no video but I think we were identified by our avatars on screen at the AGM. Like the conference call, we connected about 5 minutes beforehand to set up, identify ourselves, check volumes etc. Keith (webmaster) had provided us with the Quanta Skype name beforehand, which we put in the contacts list and used to originate the call. I don't know if it was the same at the AGM end, but when someone on Skype talked, there was an on-screen highlight which helped identify who was speaking. Call quality was great, and as I was using a headset (rather than telephone handset) it let me operate the computer at the same time, e.g. if I needed to look something up during the discussion. If we couldn't hear someone at the meeting, we were able to ask and have Chairman repeat what was said.

We had done a quick test call that morning as it was new to some of us, but it all seemed to work first time, apart from me plugging my earphone and microphone plus the wrong way round on my PC for a few seconds (age, eyesight...)

With both methods, the participant dialled in rather than someone at the meeting calling us.

With regards to bandwidth - the connections are made at the server end and just the one two-way link to the server, so you _do not_ need a separate bandwidth for each participant, luckily, or it might put a strain on the broadband if you have a fairly slow connection at the venue - the fact it['s all joined together at the server end means it should work even on fairly slow broadband at the venue.

Up to 10 participants can take part in a Skype _video_ group call (5 recommended for best quality). Callers can be on Windows, Mac, or Xbox One (if you have Xbox 1 Live Gold membership, whatever that is) (more platforms planned - Skype website says mobiles and tablets etc planned soon too). Skype website says up to 25 people on a group _audio_ call.

Hope that helps...

Dilwyn Jones
_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Actually I was hoping to get this information in October, but never mind.

This is about the level I was thinking of - more how it works out in practice than technical information - although some technical information would be welcome. I must say it must be quite difficult for the chairman to run the meeting. I know from when I chaired the AGM you rely heavily on visual contact to assess the mood of the meeting and who would like to speak. As Lee added - thanks to Lee also for his reply - there are protocol questions to watch.

I get the impression from what you and Lee write that there were teething problems, but no more than you would expect from a first attempt.

When we put electronic participation in meetings in the constitution I envisaged it as being a provision for sometime in the future, and I never expected it to be used so soon. No doubt a compliment to Keith's technical abilities,

Best Wishes,


Geoff
_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Reply via email to