[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [ga] Preliminary report on the NC June 25th meeting
Antony & Elisabeth,
Probably I am missing something here.
If the purpose of participation is to listen to the conference call,
webcasting is fit for purpose.
I participated in the 1999-06-25 teleconference by Webcast, and it was fine
(except for the inconvenient timeframe, but after few years of Internet my
internal clock is set to US time zones ;>) ).
Why look for some additional lines to the teleconf bridge, when the purpose
is not to have bilateral flow of information?
> From: Elisabeth PORTENEUVE[SMTP:Elisabeth.PORTENEUVE@cetp.ipsl.fr]
> Sent: Sunday, 04 July 1999 1:20 PM
> To: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: RE: [ga] Preliminary report on the NC June 25th meeting
> Antony Van Couvering wrote:
> > Javier,
> > Thanks for this update. Three questions:
> > 1. Is the reason for not allowing listeners on the NC teleconferences
> one of
> > cost? If so, perhaps we could come up with sponsors. Typically most of
> > cost is borne by the person phoning in - as I understand it, the cost of
> > adding lines to the bridge is not heavy. If there is another reason, I
> > would like to understand the rationale.
> ==> Antony,
> I do not know about teleconference cost in the US, but have some
> understanding for France.
> The calling person is charged the telephone fees, which for the
> international calls (Europe or US) is close to $US 25 per hour.
> Much more if the number is in AsiaPacific or Africa or
> The hosting organiser is charged with fees per each caller and
> per time, and it is not marginal (the exemple I have is approximately
> $US 10 per caller per hour).
> There are certainly technical limits about the number of possible
> If we accept NC teleconferences' listeners, we will certainly
> give an enormous advantage to the North America, and add an
> additional burden on the reminding part of the world. I do not
> think you would like it.