RE: [ga] remote participation
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Cade,Marilyn S - LGA wrote:
> Chile had a larger Latin American attendance, including drawing from the
> local community. As did Cairo... but what is the argument about, Patrick? I
> didn't say I disagreed, I said, let's not override the in person
> There is no need to treat this as a disagreement. I'm sure you didn't mean
> to do that. :-)
Not at all.
However I am in complete agreement with those that believe physical
participants have long received an unequal share of representation at these
events(mike time, etc.) Further, many of those participants (in my experience)
are the same familiar faces that are seen at each and every such event.
If you are suggesting that local attendees(those native to the region) are
afforded some level of extra consideration in receiving time, I think I'd
probably agree with that. What I'm not in favor of is the status quo,
where individuals and/or representatives of corporations who can afford to
globetrot receive undue consideration by virtue of their merely
being physically present.
What would you suggest to correct the current inequities?
Earth is a single point of failure.
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html