Stephen Farrell wrote:
If there were support for something like that I'd be willing, but I
suspect it might also generate opposition and as Dave said it puts
a big burden on the moderator.
I'd like us to stick with the jabber sessions for the next few
weeks and we can discuss it in San Diego (a
On Oct 5, 2006, at 10:14 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
Folks,
Although it's great fun to schedule a time for everyone to use
jabber together, there is nothing preventing our conducting exactly
the same style of process over email.
I know that might sound revolutionary, but it used to work pret
On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 10:19:23 -0700, Jon Callas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> We could also set up a separate, moderated list. The moderator could
> fail to post off-topic messages. It would also permit those of us
> with daft schedules and travel plans to participate.
>
Moderated IETF lists
Jon Callas wrote:
On 5 Oct 2006, at 10:14 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
...
This merely requires that we have a discussion 'chair' who introduces
the next topic, provides a bit of on-going oversight, and declares a
topic closed when it is.
And list participants that behave. From my p-o-v that i
We could also set up a separate, moderated list. The moderator could
fail to post off-topic messages. It would also permit those of us with
daft schedules and travel plans to participate.
I suggest we simply try to apply the 'meeting' model to the current
mailing list. Yes, there will be (p
On 5 Oct 2006, at 10:14 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
Folks,
Although it's great fun to schedule a time for everyone to use
jabber together, there is nothing preventing our conducting exactly
the same style of process over email.
I know that might sound revolutionary, but it used to work prett
Folks,
Although it's great fun to schedule a time for everyone to use jabber
together, there is nothing preventing our conducting exactly the same
style of process over email.
I know that might sound revolutionary, but it used to work pretty well,
before IM became popular.
This merely requ
