Research:Committee/Preferred meeting method

Update 9/8/2010 -- as per the result below, let's settle for Skype as the primary synchronous communication method. For folks who have connectivity issues, we can use SkypeOut to connect with a landline or mobile phone.--Eloquence 00:15, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Please vote for all options that are acceptable to you, and identify your preferred option.

IRC

Pros:

open standard, many open source clients
low-bandwidth, reliable
self-documenting as searchable transcript
can easily post URLs, set up bots, etc.
practically unlimited number of participants

Cons:

less natural flow of communication than voice
obscure syntax/steep learning curve for new users
- Note that there's WebChat, which is pretty straightforward. We can provide a link that points directly to the right channel.

Straw poll:

Eloquence 17:28, 27 August 2010 (UTC) (Preferred option)
DarTar 17:42, 27 August 2010 (UTC) (Preferred option)
--Yaroslav Blanter 18:19, 27 August 2010 (UTC) (normally do not use)
Ziko 19:59, 27 August 2010 (UTC) Not a fan of it, but it does the job
Millosh 00:05, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Lilaroja 17:35, 29 August 2010

Skype

Pros:

voice and video communication
familiar and widely used
files can easily be shared among all participants
conversations are encrypted

Cons:

requires participants to use proprietary software (works on Win/Mac/Linux)
higher complexity may result in technical challenges, especially with a large number of callers

I don't think voice/video is an option for more then 3-4 participants anyway -DarTar 17:47, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Questions:

Are there practical limits to participation (e.g. number of conference participants)?
Does Skype have built-in recording capabilities?
For a chat, yes, there are logs--Yaroslav Blanter 18:19, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

There are open source tools for audio recording, but all of them appear to be for Windows. [1] is my favorite. --EpochFail 21:28, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Straw poll:

Eloquence 17:28, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
DarTar 17:47, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
--Yaroslav Blanter 18:19, 27 August 2010 (UTC) (preferred option)
Ziko 19:59, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
EpochFail 21:23, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Millosh 00:06, 28 August 2010 (UTC) (if not voice)
WereSpielChequers 07:35, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Lilaroja 17:35, 29 August 2010

WebEx

Explanation: Wikimedia has a WebEx account that can be used for hosting conferences. Limit is 20 participants.

Pros:

Free call-in numbers in many countries
Supports screen sharing and whiteboarding
Requires only a phone for basic participation

Cons:

requires participants to use proprietary software to get screen sharing access (works on Win/Mac/Linux)

Questions:

Can people call in via Skype? (There may be issues with DTMF access codes.)

Straw poll:

Eloquence 17:28, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Ziko 19:59, 27 August 2010 (UTC) Sounds interesting.
Millosh 00:06, 28 August 2010 (UTC) Sounds interesting to me, too.

Overall Thoughts

[JohnRiedl] I prefer the solutions that let us talk to each other. I think it's a more natural way to communicate, allows for greater nuance in expression, and makes it easier to come to consensus. I'm fine with either of the proposed voice solutions. I use Skype often, and it works great in small groups. I haven't ever used it in a large group.

I'm open to the idea of realtime communication, but I'm not convinced that it is as efficient or as easy to document as a wiki. I'm also conscious that realtime discussions amongst several people around the planet are a nightmare to schedule and usually involve one or more people taking part at what is to them a bizarre time of the day or night, and one or more others dropping out at the last moment. So great as an icebreaker to get a team to touchbase once in a while, but not a good way to get things done or to make sure everyone is included. WereSpielChequers 16:55, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I think it can only be good for brainstorming. For everything else wiki and the mailing list suffice--Yaroslav Blanter 17:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)