On 12/2/12 8:58 AM, Keith Moore wrote: > I'd add working group chairs (though I'm sure there are a few > exceptions) to the list of those with an apparent inability to > prioritize and structure work. Or perhaps WGs should have to get > approval from their supervising AD before they can take on new > documents. There's a whole nexus of connected issues here, I think, and what a given person complains about depends on that person's pet peeves. It seems to me that if we were better about moving work forward between meetings (<- peeve!) meeting time wouldn't be chewed up with presenting the current state of the work. I think design teams are a handy tool for keeping things moving and have the side-effect of potentially improving meeting quality. I'll be the first to admit the possibility of abuse/things going wrong but I think keeping work moving is one of the keys to solving this problem. I know the EDU team is working hard and has a tough task, but I also wonder if improving however it is that we acculturate newer participants might not help, as well. I would guess that if you polled meeting participants you'd get a majority of respondents thinking that meetings are for presentation and that meetings are used for document adoption and document content decisions. Melinda