Hello Sebastian,
Actually the room type "restricted" is more usual in most situations.
But do not believe it should be removed from the room type "audience" only
by users having difficulty understanding the application of each type of
room.
If we both understand the users, then we know that the average user does
not have the patience to test or read about the details at the time of usuar
a new feature, such as the creation of rooms in OM.
If you allow me, I would suggest a second proposal: In the rooms
created by default, allow only limited, and leave the others disabled. A
user with more expert or other needs, would enable them manually.
As a testimony, I would say that I am testing the OM in the company I
work in an environment of approval, and my team has demonstrated skillful use
of all types of rooms, as the dynamics of meetings in OM. Even more, I learned
about the OM through two federal universities, which also comes with
satisfaction using other types of rooms.
Another solution to mitigate the concerns of users, would help put a
link next to the types of rooms, and can clarify their utilities.
André.
2012/2/25 [email protected] <[email protected]>
> Hi,
>
> the number of room types makes it sometimes hard for people to get
> started with OpenMeetings.
> The restricted room type is actually the better audience room type.
> So shall we just remove the room type "audience" ?
>
> Is there any VETO to delete the room type "audience" ? Stand up now or
> .... :)
>
> Sebastian
> --
> Sebastian Wagner
> http://www.openmeetings.de
> http://incubator.apache.org/openmeetings/
> http://www.webbase-design.de
> http://www.wagner-sebastian.com
> [email protected]
>
