On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 03:03:51AM +0900, Stanislav Shalunov wrote:
If we have WG meetings on Friday, technical plenary should be Friday
afternoon. If Friday is not good enough for technical plenary, it's not
good enough for WGs.
I can agree with that claim.
[If you're right about the duration being unbearable, one outcome might
be low attendance of the technical plenary. That would cost us one
poorly attended technical plenary and would put to rest the idea that
Friday is a normal day. A poorly attended technical plenary would cost
us roughly triple the damage we get from poorly attended WGs on Friday
and would thus be recouped within a year.]
That sounds like the proposal to have a trial, and see what happens.
Such a proposal doesn't sound like a terrible idea to me. The
conclusion of such a poorly-attended plenary should, of course, be
that Friday afternoons are not a good meeting time, and that therefore
the large meetings need to be reduced in size.
Alternatively, of course, we could reduce them in number. Perhaps the
One Giant Meeting of Everybody doesn't need to happen three times a
year. Some WGs are already using the virtual interim rules to
schedule a lot of virtual interim meetings. If we did more of that,
perhaps the larger meetings could be reduced in number, and the number
of sessions WGs take in the large meetings could also be reduced in
number or duration or both. I might be willing to give up two entire
weekends if I could be confident I wouldn't have to do it three times
a year.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs(_at_)shinkuro(_dot_)com
Shinkuro, Inc.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf