On 4/21/18 1:39 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
I don't see evidence sufficient to warrant a change to something else right now. In saying that I regard the 1-1-1 scheme as being somewhat aspirational in practice, and that's ok.
Agreed, and I think the crux of the conversation underway is whether these guidelines are aspirational or mandatory. The introduction of meeting-policy makes it pretty clear that the document is an attempt to write down the currently-in-use informal policy rather than change it, and I believe that any citation of meeting-policy from venue-selection needs to make the aspirational nature of the 1-1-1-* policy clear (rather than, for example, using normative language, especially at a MUST level).
/a
