However much I can agree with the advantages (and need of, at least initially) of F2F meetings, I cannot help to think about the foot-print becoming darker and darker, In days of recession, travel is likely to become more and more unaffordable for many. So yes F2F by all means for those that are within reasonable distance of travel (the interpretation of this criterium depends of course on frequency and costs or means of travel available to those involved).
But we have to keep contributing to maturing channels, methods and tools to also (increasingly) collaborate and interact in nonF2F ways. Egypt, Tunesia, Jemen, Bahrein, Syria, UK would not have happened if only relying on F2F (I think).
And... it is definitely not only about channels, methods and tools. It's is about culture, practice, habit and willingness.
To make a very provocative statement: those of us - adventurersin the permitting conditions, tend to too easily choose for F2F as it permits them to have (tiring maybe) fun on planes and exotic places...
Just back from 2 weeks Uganda (my average annual footprint is dark grey, though compensated by a willingness to work from home, shop on a bicycle, and enjoying the challenge of nonF2F collaboration, even if regularly I make mistakes).
