Requirement to go to meetings (was: Re: Anotherj RFP without IETF community input)
On 10/21/2011 7:58 PM, Melinda Shore wrote: It's increasingly the case that if you want to do work at the IETF, you need to go to meetings. I'd have considerable reservations about asking for the kind of money you're suggesting. Melinda, I've changed the subject line because the point you raise is orthogonal to the main thread, but since you raise it, it's worth exploring a bit (since I happen to agree with your observation.) The dynamics that make this true seem to have to do with changes in our community rather than in the nature of the technical work or the online tools. So the question is how to move the center of gravity back to mailing lists? d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
RE: Requirement to go to meetings (was: Re: Anotherj RFP without IETF community input)
-Original Message- From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dave CROCKER Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2011 11:27 PM To: Melinda Shore Cc: ietf@ietf.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@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Requirement to go to meetings (was: Re: Anotherj RFP without IETF community input)
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 2:26 AM, Dave CROCKER d...@dcrocker.net wrote: On 10/21/2011 7:58 PM, Melinda Shore wrote: It's increasingly the case that if you want to do work at the IETF, you need to go to meetings. I'd have considerable reservations about asking for the kind of money you're suggesting. I have been involved in the IETF for 15 years now. From my first meeting, it was apparent to me that if you want to do work at the IETF, you need to go to meetings. I wonder if in realty it has ever been different. Regards Marshall Melinda, I've changed the subject line because the point you raise is orthogonal to the main thread, but since you raise it, it's worth exploring a bit (since I happen to agree with your observation.) The dynamics that make this true seem to have to do with changes in our community rather than in the nature of the technical work or the online tools. So the question is how to move the center of gravity back to mailing lists? d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net __**_ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/ietfhttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
RE: Requirement to go to meetings (was: Re: Anotherj RFP without IETF community input)
--On Sunday, October 23, 2011 07:05 -0700 Murray S. Kucherawy m...@cloudmark.com wrote: ... 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. Murray, fwiw, your analysis doesn't require f2f meetings. If it could be done, well-conducted virtual/remote meetings would work as well because they, too involve fixed cutoffs, real-time responses, and opportunity to confront those who may not be responding, etc. At the other extreme, of course, we could adopt the model used by a few other standards bodies (and perhaps left over when mailing list meant distribution of documents by post), stop expecting anything at all from mailing lists, and hold week-long (or longer) meetings that the WG level in which we expected all of the work to get done :-( john ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
