-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 in theory it should be possible to record what is said in voice, though coordinating voice with text for context would be a bit more complicated (though a video of the meeting with a good resolution and as lossless as possible codec/compression could do it in theory, a video would also help to identify who is saying what in voice)
On 9/4/2010 08:43, Carlo Wood wrote: > On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 07:28:14AM -0400, Robert Martin wrote: >>>> Voice is a no-no for me. Being French, I can't speak and understand >>>> spoken English (and worst, American English...) well and fast enough >>>> to hold a conversation in voice. >>> >> also unless im not mistaken holding it in Voice also guarantees that >> there will not be a transcript of what was said. Unless there is now a >> rock solid low lag real time way of transcribing the voice parts since >> we are going to be discussing legal matters it needs to be recordable. > > That is probably exactly the reason why they want it to be in voice: > so that there is no transcript and nobody can use whatever is going > to be said in court at a later time. > > It is meant to be "informational" only, which is probably not very > useful indeed, unless the information flows both ways and this will > lead to a change of the TPV policy. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAku/HaYACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUrRgCfQjxNKKGbKAXBtelCXLdHtcSD lIkAnjjtfbCmTDp8rpgXhqxo3LPHNehd =U4iv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
