t.petch <daedulus(_at_)btconnect(_dot_)com> wrote:
From: "John Leslie" <john(_at_)jlc(_dot_)net>
--On Sunday, October 23, 2011 07:05 -0700 "Murray S. Kucherawy"
<msk(_at_)cloudmark(_dot_)com> wrote:
... 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.
But _why_ is that something "holding up a working group"?
Because they are the one holding the token, usually the editorship of
the I-D, and everyone else must wait for a revised version, for a
response to LC comments etc.
This is _not_ a good way to run a mailing-list!
Harking back to Melinda's comment, this is where chairmanship comes
in; the good chairs will chivy, poke and prod so that the hold-ups
are minimised...
The WGC cannot always manage this alone...
And sometimes WG chairs should prod ADs, sometimes vice versa.
ADs don't have as much time available for this as you think...
What is difficult in our structure is for those without a formal role
to insert a chivy without causing offence;
A "chivy", almost by definition, is bound to cause offense. But
a posted question, expecting an answer from a WGC, can be effective.
this is where face-to-face, with its vastly richer communication
channel, is superior.
True, but three times a year isn't often enough. :^(
--
John Leslie <john(_at_)jlc(_dot_)net>
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf