Not answering to anyone in particular. I agree that BarBOFs are useful, I just wish they were better communicated. If I had learnt about which ones were happening I might have joined. cheers ~Carlos On 3/11/13 9:56 PM, Burger Eric wrote: > I think Michael's point is that because a BOF only has two shots, people trying again do NOT go through the open, advertised process and thus end up with closed meetings where people are (almost always INADVERTENTLY) not invited. It would be more open and transparent to have these meetings on the calendar, or at least the BOF wiki. > > On Mar 11, 2013, at 7:47 PM, Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Michael, >> >> a Bar BOF is an discussion among interested people that is open for others. >> Since we like transparency and openness we invite others to join these discussions. >> >> Would you rather like to have meetings where you are not invited? >> >> Ciao >> Hannes >> >> PS: Discussions in a bar are great if you can actually hear the other person. >> >> On Mar 11, 2013, at 6:57 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: >> >>> >>> The number of side meetings is simply overwhelming. >>> I would like to propose either repealing the "2 BOF" rule, or reminding >>> ADs that they can authorize more than 2 BOFs, and they should do that. >>> >>> If we have time/place and people have free cycles for these side >>> meetings, etc. can we just put them in the schedule and be done with? >>> >>> (And no more "BAR" BOFs that aren't in the bar) >>> >>> -- >>> Michael Richardson >>> -on the road- >>> >>> >> >