William and all,
Yes William, IRC has some very good advantages, to be sure. I
personally prefer DCC for instance for sending large files to
FTP for instance. Have you considered though how great an
advantage Internet video conferencing is for meetings and
such? Try it you will like it! >;)
Monday, August 23, 1999, 7:51:20 AM, Diane Cabell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Net is in awfully early days of its use outside of academic and largely
> US/English language settings. You seem to be saying that what was good enough
> for the Wright Brothers is good enough for today's air trav
I was a math major. Arithmetic has always escaped me.
At 01:35 PM 8/23/99 -0400, you wrote:
>
>No, I oversaw the chair set up. 382.
>dc
>
>Richard J. Sexton wrote:
>
>> >There were people constantly coming in and out of the room however; some of us
>> >didn't waltz in until the agenda reached th
No, I oversaw the chair set up. 382.
dc
Richard J. Sexton wrote:
> >There were people constantly coming in and out of the room however; some of us
> >didn't waltz in until the agenda reached the topic we were interested in, so the
> >total attendance was a good bit higher than 150. I believe th
Actually I believe there's a larger issue at stake when you consider this
thread with the parallel thread about time/message limits. It is currently
under consideration (I believe) to put some limitations on how much people can
say at a microphone in Santiago and how much will be passed on from
>There were people constantly coming in and out of the room however; some of us
>didn't waltz in until the agenda reached the topic we were interested in, so the
>total attendance was a good bit higher than 150. I believe the GAC open session
>was much more crowded.
Yeah, the GAC folks and their
>> >I believe that many people on working committees simply do not find e-mail
>> >adequate to the task.
>>
>> If it wasn't adequate, the Internet would not exist; it's how we
>> got this far.
>
>The Net is in awfully early days of its use outside of academic and largely
>US/English language setti
Diane and all,
I guess this depends on what you call efficient. In terms or relation
to cost $$, it is VERY efficient. I would argue that in terms of time
E-Mail is also Very efficient, as well. I can respond to allot of E-Mails
in the time it takes me to fly to Santiago, Boston, or singapor
The Net is in awfully early days of its use outside of academic and largely
US/English language settings. You seem to be saying that what was good enough
for the Wright Brothers is good enough for today's air traveller. I don't buy
it, and I find e-mail far less efficient a means of communicatio
Thanks, Richard. That sounds a very accurate count of how many people were in the
final open meeting room at one time and is more responsive to the question of
time constraints on speakers.
There were people constantly coming in and out of the room however; some of us
didn't waltz in until the ag
>I believe that many people on working committees simply do not find e-mail
>adequate to the task.
If it wasn't adequate, the Internet would not exist; it's how we
got this far.
--
This program posts news to thousands of machines throughout the entire
civilized world. Your message will cost th
>BTW, Diane's remark ("Berlin had a heavy turnout") reminded me I
>have yet to see even the vaguest approximations of attendance at
>any of the live meetings. What kind of heaviness are we talking
>about?
At one ppoint I counted - there were roghly 150 people in the Berlin
open meeting.
--
T
Kerry Miller wrote:
> > I remain worried about our ability to review hundreds or even
> > thousands of comments fast enough. It's hard, and we may be pushed
> > to our limits by the Santiago time zone...
>
> Your half-dozen references to *time* constraints make one wonder
> what the perceived
> I remain worried about our ability to review hundreds or even
> thousands of comments fast enough. It's hard, and we may be pushed
> to our limits by the Santiago time zone...
Your half-dozen references to *time* constraints make one wonder
what the perceived benefit is of forcing these co
14 matches
Mail list logo
