On 4/21/18 4:56 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> On 22 Apr 2018, at 1:56 am, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@xxxxxx> wrote:
>> I do not support the 1-1-1 policy as it is based on a false premise
>> that this mirrors our participation.
> I don't support it on that basis either, as it's a pretty bad
> reason.
>
> I do support it because, [ extremely sane list elided ]
I would regret seeing the discussion get sucked into
attempting to get more precision than is possible or
appropriate in the geographical distribution of meetings,
and I would be somewhat baffled if it held up moving the
document along. It seems to me that getting it roughly
correct is exactly correct, given levels of uncertainty
about participation (the visa problem seems far more
pressing to me than the hours-on-a-plane problem, and
that's really not addressed by the 1-1-1 policy) and
given how unstable the world is at present.
I hope that if the 1-1-1 policy is revisited it's because
of a policy issue rather than a we-want-more-precision
issue.
Melinda
--
Software longa, hardware brevis
PGP fingerprint: 4F68 2D93 2A17 96F8 20F2
34C0 DFB8 9172 9A76 DB8F
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
