-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Dave CROCKER
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2011 11:27 PM
To: Melinda Shore
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Requirement to go to meetings (was: Re: Anotherj RFP without IETF
community input)
So the question is how to move the center of gravity back to mailing
lists?
Tough call. I completely understand the need and desire to be productive
without requiring meetings, for all the financial, participation, and other
reasons given. But I also am very familiar with the fact that getting work
done on lists can be a real challenge: People get sidetracked and can take
days, weeks, or even months to answer something that's holding up a working
group.
I suspect decisions get made in person because people show up, perhaps out of
fear that they will have missed an opportunity to be heard or influence a key
decision. There's a feeling that meetings produce action items, where in the
list environment action items get assigned when consensus gets around to
warranting it.
If you're sitting on a mailing list and someone asks you to provide a document
review by some date and you say nothing, there's no indication of whether or
not you even got the request. If you're sitting in a meeting room and someone
asks you to provide a document review by some date, that person is likely to
get an answer from you right away.
In short: Meetings don't stall, but lists do. And I think, therefore, that
many people find the meetings important, perhaps enough so that they save all
their WG energy for the meetings.
I don't think it's best for maximum participation, especially given the costs
of the meetings as per discussion in the other thread, but I understand why it
is that way.
-MSK
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf