IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: For Review: IESG Statement on Guidance on Face-to-Face and Virtual Interim Meetings

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Fri, 11 December 2015 16:14 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 324791B2C36 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 08:14:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PI_uyAHBbGwY for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 08:14:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A76041B2C31 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 08:14:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.99] (76-218-10-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.10.206]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tBBGEPpB026541 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 08:14:25 -0800
Subject: Re: For Review: IESG Statement on Guidance on Face-to-Face and Virtual Interim Meetings
References: <20151210164031.22024.98672.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <019701d1336d$eae05fc0$c0a11f40$@olddog.co.uk> <566A9A77.6050509@alvestrand.no> <297B6CE7-BF78-4854-ABE5-6A295B746875@nostrum.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <566AF67D.3050503@dcrocker.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 08:14:53 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <297B6CE7-BF78-4854-ABE5-6A295B746875@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Fri, 11 Dec 2015 08:14:25 -0800 (PST)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/SHRD1v5jWHRAI8e4tOm5GABeEXo>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 16:14:27 -0000

> I agree. I think this is a matter of balancing efficiency with
> inclusiveness. That balance will vary by working group, and hopefully
> the chairs can do the right thing for their group.


There certainly are some topics and some groups that require real-time
interaction in order to resolve one or another point.

But arguably the increasing reliance on real-time interaction is
primarily because it is easier (for those choosing that mode.)

It takes some learning and some on-going discipline to do serious group
collaboration through email.  It takes far less learning and usually
less discipline to work through a teleconference or a f2f meeting.

A real commitment to real inclusiveness is not free.


d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email