|
Grex > Coop13 > #36: Grex Board of Director’s Meeting 11/25/03 | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 82 responses total. |
willcome
|
|
response 50 of 82:
| 
Dec 2 11:31 UTC 2003 |
I'm going to picket Grex.
|
aruba
|
|
response 51 of 82:
|
Dec 2 13:47 UTC 2003 |
Geez, Richard, you really can blow things out of proportion.
The bylaw is not meant to discriminate, and I have absolutely no doubt
that if a deaf person was elected to the board, the board would find a way
for him or her to participate. (And this issue was discussed at the time
the amendment was voted on.)
The reason I insisted on the "hear and be heard" phrasing was:
1) Trying to have a meeting in which people participated textually would
be very slow and very tedious, and it would be very hard to get anything
done.
2) It's been my observation over the years that Grexers who interact in
person do so much more civilly and productively than those who only
interact online. This has to do with voice tones, body language, and
general realization that the person you're dealing with is real, not just
pixels on the screen or an automated responder. It was worth giving up
the body language to allow remote board members to participate, but not
worth giving up the whole package, IMO.
Anyone's welcome to propose an amendment to the "hear and be heard"
amendment, of course. But keep in mind that it passed by the minimum
margin.
|
jp2
|
|
response 52 of 82:
|
Dec 2 13:53 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
gull
|
|
response 53 of 82:
|
Dec 2 15:00 UTC 2003 |
Re resp:37: Even my boss, who is a determined Microsoft-hater, likes MS
Internet Messenger's voice chat feature.
Re resp:38: I think if you want to pursue this, you should probably
create another item for discussing the bylaw change.
|
mynxcat
|
|
response 54 of 82:
|
Dec 2 15:56 UTC 2003 |
I'm with aruba on this one. Richard, you're being extremely nit-picky.
Even if you're not happy with the "heard and be heard" clause, we
could change it to "through lip-reading or by sign language". I think
this would satisfy everyone. If the deaf person happens to be a remote
user, he can have an interpreter who can sign him and talk into the
phone. I view this like the problem with long distance charges. If a
remote member wants to be on board, they need to come up with the
phone charges.
I don't think holding the board meeting through text is a viable option
|
scg
|
|
response 55 of 82:
|
Dec 2 18:55 UTC 2003 |
Presumably if there's somebody who actually needs to meet via text due to some
sort of disability, the board will be reasonable and will make accomodations.
|
willcome
|
|
response 56 of 82:
|
Dec 2 20:40 UTC 2003 |
That doesn't mean the by-laws aren't discriminatory.
|
tod
|
|
response 57 of 82:
|
Dec 2 23:06 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
mary
|
|
response 58 of 82:
|
Dec 3 12:51 UTC 2003 |
Zing's is fine with us using their public wireless network.
Unfortunately, we won't be able to hook up to a POTS line from
any room at Zing's.
The simplest way of connecting a remote board member would be for Grex to
purchase a $30 speaker telephone and have the remote user call us using
his mega or unlimited minutes. But this would mean we'd need to move our
meetings to one of our homes, most likely. I could live with that but I'd
like to hear what others think.
If we find a cheap used laptop, or if one was donated to Grex, then we
could stay at Zing's and use their network. Zing's can make no promise as
to network uptime. They are offering this as a courtesy. I expect there
would be times when we'd find it's not working - and we'd need to be
understanding.
|
keesan
|
|
response 59 of 82:
|
Dec 3 13:03 UTC 2003 |
We own several speaker telephones that grex could use, and Kiwanis has more.
Why waste $30 on a new one?
|
gull
|
|
response 60 of 82:
|
Dec 3 14:24 UTC 2003 |
Keep in mind that any speaker phone in the $30 range will be half
duplex. That means any time anyone in the room is talking (or there's
any other noise) the speaker will be muted and the person at the other
end won't be able to be heard. I've found this type of speakerphone
worse than useless in anything but a totally quiet environment.
|
tod
|
|
response 61 of 82:
|
Dec 3 17:18 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
aruba
|
|
response 62 of 82:
|
Dec 3 19:59 UTC 2003 |
I've heard the same thing David has about half-duplex phones. Why does it
cost more for a full-duplex one?
|
gull
|
|
response 63 of 82:
|
Dec 3 21:24 UTC 2003 |
They're much more complex electronically, and there are a lot of complicated
acoustic issues to solve. You have to figure out how to keep the mic and
speaker from feeding back to each other if there's some sidetone on the
line, and how to prevent echoing and other unpleasant effects.
|
aruba
|
|
response 64 of 82:
|
Dec 3 22:27 UTC 2003 |
I see, that makes sense. Thanks. How much are we talking for a full-duplex
phone?
|
mary
|
|
response 65 of 82:
|
Dec 3 23:22 UTC 2003 |
Playcom seems to specialize in conferencing telephones. They run
from about $265 to, way up there.
Here's the least expensive one I found:
http://www.buy.com/retail/electronics/product.asp?
loc=514&sku=10084336
|
tod
|
|
response 66 of 82:
|
Dec 4 00:10 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
aruba
|
|
response 67 of 82:
|
Dec 4 00:31 UTC 2003 |
Well, that's a lot of money.
Tod: see previous responses.
|
tod
|
|
response 68 of 82:
|
Dec 4 01:11 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 69 of 82:
|
Dec 4 01:22 UTC 2003 |
It could be two people, and if someone in the room is talking, the people on
the far end can't be heard to ask for the floor.
|
mynxcat
|
|
response 70 of 82:
|
Dec 4 01:30 UTC 2003 |
You may need to start the practice of actually asking the person on the phone
if he has anything to say. I know it seems a little clunky...
|
tod
|
|
response 71 of 82:
|
Dec 4 01:30 UTC 2003 |
This response has been erased.
|
scg
|
|
response 72 of 82:
|
Dec 4 08:02 UTC 2003 |
The Polycom phones are the really serious conference room phones, which are
quite nice, but cost quite a lot. I think the two line, full duplex, ATT
speakerphone I have on my desk was somewhere under $100 three years ago, so
I assume there are still lower end phones that would work.
I've seen a speakerphone attachment that plugs into a cell phone, which seems
to work ok. That might be a reasonable option. Also, there are some nice
VOIP "soft phones" that will run on a PC and should be able to link up with
the PSTN through some gateway service, which should perform nicely when paired
with good speakers and a good microphone (in other words, not the built in
microphone on the notebook it's running on).
It seems to me you've got three scenarios to consider here; one in which you
have just one remote board member, another in which you have two remote board
members, and a third in which you have three or more. In the one remote
member scenario, all you need is a point to point connection of some sort,
which is a standard phone call and therefore easy. Two remote board members
can probably be handled through "three way calling," although that should be
handled in a phone switch rather than inside somebody's phone so the two
remote people can hear eachother clearly. The scenario in which there are
many remote board members probably requires a real conference bridge of some
sort. There are lots of companies that sell this service, although it may
not be all that cheap. There are also a lot of corporate phone switches that
include a system called Meeting Place, which does this quite well. If
somebody reading this works for a company with a Meeting Place system, and
would be willing to donate some off hours use of it, that would be quite
useful.
|
mary
|
|
response 73 of 82:
|
Dec 4 12:26 UTC 2003 |
Interesting about the cell phone speakerphone you've seen. The only one
I've been able to locate that isn't designed to be useful outside a car
without jumping through hoops is specific for Motorola phones.
I think our first step should be an inexpensive or free regular
speakerphone. See how that goes and then fine tune the connection.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 74 of 82:
|
Dec 4 12:52 UTC 2003 |
CCM Clip N Go (http://www.1800mobiles.com/clipngo.html) works with a
variety of Motorola and Nokia telephones. It apparently includes both a
cigarette-lighter adaptor and a travel (AC?) adaptor. It's listed at $25.99.
|