Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Rich's point about the lack of additional voices from the dais > was well-taken Thanks for starting this Melinda. I decided last night to write a note from my (limited) perspective, but opted to head for bed instead and write in the morning when I was thinking and writing more clearly. So I'll steal your subject line instead. In an odd place of "IAB hat on, but not speaking as an individual and not for the IAB": For me, my primary purpose this week is to listen. I'm a long time IETFer but new to the IAB, new to the situation and have been spinning as quickly as possible in this particular situation by reading, watching (the IETF++ bof, which I originally missed) and listening to opinions. My plan for the plenary last night was to collect and absorb more information, take a few notes on my phone and to begin forming a path toward consensus on where to go from here. I was incredibly frustrated to hear that the most important night we needed an unlimited time-length plenary with community dialog was one night where we didn't have the option to do so, so I personally felt it most important to listen to comments and suggestions coming froward. I'd like to thank everyone for the comments they brought last night; the night was incredibly productive for me and some of my phone-jotted notes are likely going to be the foundation of my opinions going forward. Likewise, I've appreciated all of the hallway conversations I've had this week (which started in airport hallways), and hope to have more while the week wraps up. Please do come talk to me if you have suggestions for future directions of the RSE structure that you'd like me to consider. I'm a firm believer in consensus as a process, and successful consensus requires hearing from as many voices as possible in order to determine a best path forward. -- Wes Hardaker USC/ISI
