[Gendispatch] Re: New draft: draft-rescorla-auto-minutes-00

[Pete Resnick <[e-mail]>]

I agree with Joel, at least in part:

If this were reframed as "The auto-transcript should always be included 
in the proceedings", I have no problem at all, and in fact very much 
want that. But this shouldn't replace the minutes. If a chair wants to 
correct and copy the auto-transcript into the minutes, that's their call 
(a bad one I think), but really we should leave the "minutes" space open 
for real minutes, with truly short summaries of what was said and 
conclusions which may not be gleaned from the transcript.

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best

On 7 Oct 2025, at 3:38, Eric Rescorla wrote:

> Aargh:
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-rescorla-auto-minutes-00.html
>
> -Ekr
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2025 at 1:33 AM Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Greetings fellow gendispatchers,
>>
>> Have you ever taken minutes for a WG? Have you ever been the chair
>> desperately begging for someone to take minutes? Have you ever been
>> the person sitting in the front row refusing to look the chair in the
>> eye while they desperately tried to get someone to take minutes? It
>> doesn't have to be that way.
>>
>> For the past several years we have routinely made audio and video
>> recordings of WG sessions, which also include transcriptions, thus
>> providing a record of what happened in each WG session, and avoiding
>> the need for manual transcription. To that end, my co-authors and I
>> have published the following draft:
>>
>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/di.html
>>
>> This draft recognizes the practice of using the automated transcript
>> as a starting point for the minutes (with the chairs having the final
>> approval, of course), and asks the IETF LLC to make a few small
>> changes to the tools to facilitate that practice.
>>
>> -Ekr
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>