IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Barely literate minutes

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Thu, 29 November 2012 15:36 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C436521F85ED for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 07:36:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7WJqk78mbBvb for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 07:36:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32C3921F85E2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 07:36:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.9] (adsl-67-127-190-125.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.127.190.125]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qATFaccM004073 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 07:36:38 -0800
Message-ID: <50B78102.1020705@dcrocker.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 07:36:34 -0800
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Barely literate minutes
References: <CAC4RtVCogYS4tmY1LLi0C-E+B+di2_wTD0N-=AZrVR7-A8Mz+A@mail.gmail.com> <50B5C839.4060909@gmail.com> <59924CD37D50616BA8EB8EF7@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20121128023905.0afdcde0@resistor.net> <50B683C4.2030503@stpeter.im> <50B68612.7080107@dcrocker.net> <50B693ED.7000609@stpeter.im> <50B696B0.30904@qti.qualcomm.com> <m2lidl5ntp.wl%randy@psg.com> <BB22CC86-F9B8-4727-BCA3-F617221944F2@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BB22CC86-F9B8-4727-BCA3-F617221944F2@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Thu, 29 Nov 2012 07:36:39 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 15:36:39 -0000

On 11/28/2012 3:57 PM, Bob Hinden wrote:
> It's much easier to reach a consensus face to face, than on a mailing list.  I think we have all seen this.


F2f meetings are explicitly managed, with significant control of the 
room.  Mailing list exchanges are typically not managed at all.

Given the difference, it's not surprising that one proves more 
productive than the other.

d/

-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email