A couple of weeks ago-ish, I started working-group last call on the subject document, and said this:
> Please do not > wait until the last minute, and especially do not wait until the > document goes to the IESG. You will be beaten with a rubber > truncheon. It seems that I do need to get out my truncheon. John Levine and Steve Atkins did, indeed, wait until the last minute. Despite participation in the last-call conversation, they provided *major* edits to the editor (1) off list, and (2) after WGLC ended. Now, I'm not one to hold a line, at least not at this point, and say that we won't consider useful input because an arbitrary deadline wasn't met. At the same time, this sort of behaviour is abusive to the working group. It abuses process, it abuses the chair's desire to accommodate all reasonable input, and, most significantly, it shows a complete lack of respect for the time and effort of the other participants. We spent ten days hashing out what some thought were the final details of an almost-done document, only to find that a couple of participants thought it proper to do significant rewrites at the last minute and without discussing them with the group. Everyone: My interest in accommodating everyone's input and allowing for busy schedules that include things other than MARF participation is getting a bit frayed. I consider that the AS document is back to "active document" state. We will continue discussing it. We will come to rough consensus on all, some, or none of the recent changes. WHen we've decided where the working group as a collective roughitude stands on it, we will re-do working-group last call. And we will expect that discussion will quickly converge so that we can send this to the IESG before the Paris IETF meeting. And we will NOT do this sort of thing again. Barry, as increasingly annoyed chair _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
