> Il 21/04/2020 03:25 George Michaelson <ggm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> ha scritto: > > I am a participant in IETF in WG which have a predominant membership > of US and EU active members who wish to discuss. I don't like this, > but I accept the reality I am in a minority of 2-3 and we maybe have > to incur the cost to meet at 3am local body clock time. Or 6am. It is > extremely unlikely we'd meet in my body clock. > > If you told me there is a WG with a high bodycount in China and India > I could believe they'd prefer to meet in their local shared timezones > window. Wouldn't that make sense? The problem with this approach is that it reinforces the imbalances that already exist in a group. If there is low participation by people in the Asia/Pacific timezone group, then all meetings get set in American or European timezones, then it will be very inconvenient for people from Asia/Pacific to join, then you will have less and less participants from there. This is why many international organizations choose exactly the opposite approach - to hold meetings in places (or, in the new normal virtuality, timezones) where the organization has very few regular participants. -- Vittorio Bertola | Head of Policy & Innovation, Open-Xchange vittorio.bertola@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Office @ Via Treviso 12, 10144 Torino, Italy
