In message <9D9C9EE8-290D-4A80-9061-CC79A5098A95@xxxxxxxxx>, "Fred Baker (fred)" writes: > > On Oct 20, 2015, at 7:15 PM, marka@xxxxxxx wrote: > > > > Why force people to use the exception mechanisms when a little bit of > > proactive action can avoid the issue altogether? > > What specifically are you asking? Are you asking the IESG to be > proactive, or the working group chair, or the author(s)? In what specific > way would you like people to be proactive? The last reminder I got had a 9 days until the draft expired. The reminder that triggered this thread had 1.x days and less time than that to submit before the embargo. Expires: 2015-10-20 (in 19 hours, 17 minutes) That all reminders that would be sent out in the 9 days upto the submissing embargo and all reminders that would be sent during the submission embargo be brought forward to the T-9 days. That the start and end times of the current/next submission embargo be in the reminder emails. The allows all authors 9 days in which to submit a update after the reminder without encountering a embargo period. It also allows authors to plan their work schedule without having to go and lookup when the next embargo period starts. Getting a reminder, doing the work, then not being able to submit it because you ran into the embargo period kind of defeats the purpose of the reminder. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@xxxxxxx