On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 14:32 +0000, Ted Lemon wrote: > > If we exclude WG adoption of drafts, how many decisions are taken (to > > be confirmed on the list) in a meeting? > > DHC 2 > > The metrics used do not paint a true picture of the sessions. > > In the case of DHC at least, the metrics are pretty accurate. There > was barely time in the wg meeting to actually have any meaningful > discussion about anything, so each presentation wound up being "sales > pitch, a few comments, chair interrupts for time, next steps, next > presentation." It wasn't really a good use of f2f meeting time, and > I'd like to do it differently at the next IETF, but I don't really > know how, because there weren't a lot of presentations that the > working group shouldn't have heard, and we got one of the nice like > 2.5h time slots.
Maybe you're not being conservative enough about what is a presentation the working group should hear. I generally try to avoid "presentations" at all, reserving meeting time for things that actually require face-to-face time in order to get work done and move things forward. I regularly turn down requests for meeting time to present some new work or proposed work to the WG that hasn't been discussed on the meeting list. We still don't take a lot of decisions in any one meeting, but the ones we do are often things for which discussion took a fair amount of time. I don't claim to follow this principle perfectly, but it is something I try to do, because I hate sitting in a meeting with a full agenda and not getting work done because someone is droning on about something we could have learned by reading a draft or having a discussion on the mailing list. -- Jeff _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html. https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vmeet
