[BWNA] Video taping at meetings

[Deborah Ham]

I regret that I will be unable to attend the next Board meeting, as I 
will be in Canada. Please allow me to use this vehicle to comment on the 
concerns expressed by Albert about video taping the meetings. It may be 
worth noting that I am personally unaffected by video or audio taping, 
so these comments are relatively free of any bias on that basis.

When objections to taping have been voiced in the past, Jim’s responses 
have conveyed his desire for accuracy. I think this is something we all 
appreciate and want to support. Jim obviously takes great care and 
devotes considerable attention to this (generally thankless) task. His 
commitment to these duties constitutes a tremendous service to our 
community. Accuracy, in addition to being one of Jim's personal values, 
is important for all of us, as it prevents misunderstandings and other 
complications.

Equally as important as accuracy is the importance of broad range 
participation in our meetings. In the year I have been attending the 
general meetings, I have heard at least three different people object 
publicly to the taping. On at least one occasion, a participant asked to 
have the tape turned off during her comment, and it was resumed when she 
finished speaking. One must assume that there are others who find the 
taping disturbing, but perhaps chose to minimize their participation 
rather than state objections (and have it recorded!)

This would indicate to me that the highest level of general 
participation is currently being sacrificed to the practice of video 
recording. If this is so, then we must determine if participation trumps 
accuracy. Or, alternatively, we must determine some means of assuring 
accuracy other than video taping.

Some alternative suggestions:
_Use an audio tape recorder instead of a video recorder_: Less 
intrusive, and may be a bit more comfortable for some. However, some 
will still find this objectionable and inhibiting. Plus, this method 
doesn’t record “WHO” is speaking. If the minute taker doesn’t recognize 
the voice or have name for that person, this detail is lost. (Maybe that 
loss is okay?)

_Continue with video recording, stating at the beginning of each meeting 
that anyone who objects may ask to have the camera turned off while they 
are speaking_. This won’t fully solve the matter, as some will feel too 
inhibited to ask for this, even if they want it. And, of course, this 
would make for a rather interrupted recording as long as Albert is at 
the helm!

_Have two minute takers, and compare notes. H_ope that one picks up any 
details left by the other. This is more time consuming, perhaps, and 
there’s no assurance that they won’t both record the same things and 
miss the same things, leaving holes broad enough for trucks to drive 
through. Moreover, it’s going to be hard to find a second person as 
conscientious as Jim!

_Let the minute taker off the hook_. Assure him/her that we do not 
expect perfection and the _minutes don’t have to be accurate_. They just 
have to provide a sense of the group’s intention. Close enough is good 
enough for most things. But when its dates or dollar amounts, such 
oversights could be problematic. (A vote in favor of lax minutes may 
mean we sacrifice Jim services, since his desire for accuracy would not 
be served. There are undoubtedly other good ways and places for Jim to 
serve, but we would be left with some big shoes to fill!)

_Do away with recorded minutes altogether_. Decide that if people don’t 
consider it important enough to remember without it being written down, 
it probably won’t matter anyway. This simplifies some things, but 
greatly complicates others. Too many of the Board members have passed 
the prime memory time-line! We would surely be re-inventing the wheel 
most meetings!

_Each time something “noteworthy” is said or decided, pause the meeting 
long enough to have the note taker read what was recorded_. If the group 
agrees with that version, proceed with the next topic. This will slow 
the meeting a little, because more discussion or clarification may be 
needed on confusing or controversial topics. But it’s possible that this 
approach will assure even greater accuracy than a video recording, 
because misunderstandings or misinterpretations will be dealt with in 
“real time.”

Regards to all of you.

Deborah