Re: Interim meetings - changing the way we work

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Feb 26, 2015, at 10:57 AM, Joel Halpern Direct <jmh.direct@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> One of the working groups where I have observed this is one where I am a document author and was an active contributor. I am still trying to contribute.  Minutes don't cut it. 

It seems to me that if an active participant can't participate, that's a problem that the chairs need to address.   If the chairs aren't responsive, you should appeal to your AD, and if that fails to the IESG as a whole.

> But pretending that frequent working group (not design team, working group) conference calls are a good way to work and consistent with our ethos does not match what I have seen.

Hm, I suppose that if "our" ethos is that all work occurs on mailing lists, then you are right, but I have two objections to this: first, it's not necessary correct that every working group should follow the same practices in this regard.  Second, we in fact do do work during f2f meetings, and the rule is "confirm on the mailing list."   If working groups are not following that same practice during interim meetings, they are doing it wrong.

As a participant, it's your obligation to be part of the feedback loop that corrects this, and not just accept it as a fait accomplis.   Despite what may appear to be the case, ADs are not omniscient, nor are working group chairs.   Well, I guess actually that's not the appearance either... :)






[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]