Kevin,
We understand your perspective and I'll answer this in two ways:
First, we've been doing the agreements this way for a while and haven't
seen any negative consequences. Thus I would say that the evidence does
not support your opinion.
Second, it is important from a legal perspective that we get people's
e-signatures before they speak. In the past, we've had difficulty with
people not signing their agreements. Peer pressure is one of the main
mechanisms that open source projects use to enforce their rules and
thus my choice of peer pressure in this case is consistent with other
uses of peer pressure in Eclipse-land.
Third, there's an easy solution for authors whose co-authors are more
corporately delayed: remove those other co-authors until their legal
departments can return a verdict and then re-add the co-authors at that
time. In the meantime, the less delayed co-authors will have signed and
can use their discount coupon to register.
- Bjorn
Kevin McGuire wrote:
I strongly feel we should
remove this restriction
of all speakers signing before one can register. One signature, one
registration.
P.S. Nothing is preventing co-authors from registering - the only
constraint is registering at a discount/free. For long talks, the
need-all-signatures constraint only delays the free registration: those
who are paying can register as soon as they want.
--
[end of message]
|