Do not reply-to-all or forward it without the author's permission.
An additional thought about Friday meetings that the survey doesn't capture...
Whether the problem is "Friday" or "after four days", our meetings are intense enough that many of the people who are participating in several WGs, the plenaries, etc., end up in a state by Friday such that they aren't real functional (terms like "wasted" and "zombie" come to mind). Especially since that high-activity group includes all, or almost all, of the IAB and IESG, Friday sessions seem to have rather low productivity or at least discussions that are unusually risky in terms of reaching well-thought-out conclusions.
Many years ago, we tried having the IESG meet Friday mornings (in a meeting slot) to give them an opportunity to reprise the week, identify issues, make plans, highlight things needing cross-area attention, etc. We finally gave it up after noticing that we spent a lot of time staring at each other, unable to form complete sentences and showing other signs of mental exhaustion.
Unless we can figure out a way to reduce the level of exhaustion that comes with our present schedule, I'd question the productivity of adding a full extra day, even if no other considerations applied. For example, I've not in favor of it, but Friday (or fifth-day) sessions would make a lot more sense to me if we dropped all evening sessions, including the plenaries, and moved them into the daytime.
Or perhaps I'm just getting old :-(
john
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf