Dave Crocker wrote:
Barry Leiba wrote:
Dave, it's not clear whether you actually object to it, or whether
you're just concerned that others might have a problem with it, and
are noting that it's not standard procedure.
I see these two points choices are compatible.
While a complete answer would prompt us to wander into much larger
issues, let's leave it at:
Before we declare a requirement for a conference call effort, we
should pursue attempting to resolve Issues on the list, in order to
assure both the widest possible participation and better time for
contemplation. Real-time exchanges are useful when folks largely or
completely understand issues. Because they take place over a long
time, lists are better for contemplation and for offlist (hallway)
discussion.
Since a number of the Issues involve conceptual points, I believe
the group needs to first use the more deliberative mode of discussion.
Please do note that I did say "widest possible participation".
Although formally open participation, and not nearly as restrictive as
a face to face meeting, a conference call does serve to limit
participation. The logistical issues unavoidably act as a filter.
Barry,
I suggest we follow the process to the letter. If that means that we
need to start later in January, so be it.
-Jim
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html