[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Debconf-team] Draft of the "Call for Proposals"



Hi,

On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 10:43:27PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> below are my own opinions, I am not speaking for the content team as a
> whole.
> 
> On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 03:21:02PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> > Four bits of feedback:
> > 
> > First, are we sure we want to invite talks and leave it up entirely
> > to the presenter, whether they can be broadcast by video? Shouldn't
> > it be much more that we require permission to broadcast by video all
> > presentations (not necessarily debates or ad-hoc stuff) and will
> > make exceptions only if given a good reason?
>  
> I tend to agree with you here. Remote participation is a very important
> part and we should make it clear that livestream and recordings are
> absolutely supposed to be the default.
>
I really don't like this approach. People who have a problem with video would
refrain from participating if they need to convince us that they have a good
reason. Yes video is important, but IMHO we shouldn't do it on the cost of
risking to disrespect the speakers' right to choose how to use their image.

Moreover, this is a problem that does not exist. We don't see people abusing
from the fact that they can opt-out from video coverage. I don't have the
numbers, but following the video team for years, I know that only a few people
request for not be covered by video, and I don't think this compromises the
quality of the conference.

IMHO We can make it the default and explain the importance of video for remote
participation, but a simple "I'm sorry but I don't feel comfortable with that"
would be a good enough reason for not being recorded.

Tassia.

Reply to: