Re: Question about pre-meeting document posting deadlines for the IESG and the community

[Pete Resnick <[e-mail]>]

On 23 Mar 2024, at 8:48, Keith Moore wrote:

> On 3/23/24 04:46, S Moonesamy wrote:
>
>> At 09:22 PM 22-03-2024, John C Klensin wrote:
>>> I think where we disagree is that I'm at least a little more
>>> concerned about working groups that become too homogeneous and
>>> resistant to "outsider" views and input. [...]
>>> [...]  So I see "AD must approve" as a possible
>>> small way to alert an AD that someone out of the ordinary
>>> _might_ be going on.  I'd be almost as happy with "WG Chair can
>>> decide, but AD must be notified in a timely way and has the
>>> right to override the decision".
>>
>>   1. A WG Chair decides to allow an I-D to be added a day
>>      before a meeting.
>>
>>   2. There isn't any complaint about the decision.
>
> A decision made a day before a meeting doesn't allow enough time to 
> see whether there would be complaints.

Completely agree with Keith that making these decisions at the last 
minute is not acceptable.

But where I disagree with John is with the notion that these artificial 
rules and procedures address the issue in any meaningful way. Insofar as 
there are groups that are "too homogenous and resistant to 'outsider' 
views and input" (and I don't doubt there are some), that's a cultural 
problem. It's caused by chairs who are not sufficiently sensitive to the 
issue (or the ADs appointing them), or the charter not being clear about 
bringing in the right amount of well-rounded input, or chairs who are 
not pushing back on their WGs, or an IESG or IAB not paying attention 
and giving appropriate guidance, or other similar possible causes. A 
relatively arbitrary rule or procedure that throws up a road block for a 
train that's already drifting off the rails doesn't do much. At best, 
it's simply an annoyance, a barrier that folks will simply route around 
or plow through; at worst, it makes things worse by removing 
responsibility from chairs to make thoughtful decisions.

If the culture of the organization is shifting away from principles that 
many of us think are core and foundational, that stinks. Shifting back 
to those principles is hard and takes serious conversations and work. 
Quick "fixes" (that I don't think do much fixing) aren't the way.

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