Hi list --

Many thanks for all these reactions and ideas.

Here's my [as usual] long-winded set of thoughts, which as program
chair I guess I'll implement unless between now and then a better
idea comes along or the executive committee really doesn't like it.

My inclination is continue the requirement that at least some number
of hard copies be brought to the paper session because I think
some substantial part of our membership expects to touch and feel
hard copy when they hear a paper. It is also a sort of a "statute of
frauds" - like thing -- maintaining a high quality of papers was a
major major concern in the membership survey, and I wonder about
the effects of not needing to produce a hard copy at all would have
on quality, since we do not require advance submission of the paper
in most cases but referee from the abstract.

The rest of my inclination -- at least as a first departure from
tradition -- is to let the paper presenter decide how to handle extra
copies beyond X required number of hard copies (5? 10?). The
presenter could keep bringing 25 hard copies or bring X hard
copies +  25 - X diskette versions. Maybe someday we'll be able to
install airports and just zap them to the audience's laptops as we
speak, so to speak. [aside: Our son has installed an airport in our
house; the DSL line will be installed Thursday; wireless high speed
internet service from anywhere in the house and the yard, including
under the magnolias. Does everybody else already have this and I
am just behind the times, as usual, or is this cool ???]

A table for sale of papers idea would be attractive if we had the
person power to do it. It would make it a little harder to obtain a copy
of a paper one has seen presented. And, alas, we might be throwing
out more paper than we do now.

The web site poses some issues like the one Royce raised. Having
the proceedings on the web would not pose those problems. Maybe
it is on the web. Maybe I ought to know. Help, Dan.

The common computer scenario raises virus issues, I am told. We
had thought that seemed like an excellent solution.

I'm a little surprised by the plagiarism concerns, too. Another reason
for omitting footnotes (which I have done) is to keep the length and
weight reasonable, and footnotes shouldn't be all that important to
the casual reader at a meeting. Those concerned about having their
footnotes napstered (see, it's a verb now -- I napster, you napster,
he napsters, we napster, ya'll napster, they napster) can do text-only
electronic versions.

Will this model be acceptable to the membership?

Ginny