At 7:27 PM -0500 1/12/16, John C Klensin wrote:
The IESG decided that we should go to South America
(whether they or IAOC came up with the idea seems to be in
dispute). The community was asked if that would be ok (without
mentioning the implications for the hotel situation), came up
with answers the IESG interpreted as "yes', and then the
Meetings Committee moved ahead to make the best arrangements
possible given that the decision to go to Buenos Aires had
already been made.
Now, you probably see some problems with that sequence of events
(and I do too), but it seems to me that, if the Meetings
Committee is given what it reasonably construes as instructions
from the IAOC and/or IESG to hold a meeting in a particular
place at a particular time, then what we ended up with is
exactly what one should expect unless there are definite rules
that say "either these conditions MUST be met or you need to
come back to the community for explicit approval with the rule
for which an exception is proposed explicitly identified".
Noting comments from Ole, Bob Hinden, and others, there also
better be _very_ few such rules because the various systems are
easily overconstrained.
Seems like a good way forward.
--
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly selected tag: ---------------
Change from 1980 to 2013 in California's spending on public universities: -13%
On prisons: +436%
--Harper's Index May 2013 (figures as of March 2013)