"Perhaps the reason an automatic meeting-minutes-taker has not yet been developed is because it's indescribably boring. Great minds, even artificial ones, prefer to do fun stuff, not dull stuff."
Start assigning programmers to take minutes. Problem solved.
Back to the problem at hand: "taking minutes" is far different than "making a transcription". Minutes should reflect who attended, what topics were discussed, what decisions were made (including vote tallies if roll call votes were required), and maybe a few items to be read in as official records (financial records, for instance). In some circumstances, discussion points should be noted ("the council discussed the fact that red paint on the bike shed may offend some people, but it concluded sealing the wood from the elements was of higher priority) if there's value in noting that something was taken into consideration. For a business meeting, the decisions made section includes any action items (including who is responsible and when the items are deliverable).
Minutes should not contain a "he said/ she said" breakdown. They don't need a passive-aggressive comment on how long a discussion took.
If you need a transcript, make a recording or hire a stenographer.
Don't try to invent a hybrid between minutes and a transcript.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
