Re: "Blue sheets" [ Interim meetings - changing the way we work]

[t.p. <[e-mail]>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Benson Schliesser" <[e-mail]>
To: "Yoav Nir" <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 7:29 PM
>
> Yoav Nir wrote:
> >> On Feb 26, 2015, at 6:53 AM, Benson
Schliesser<[e-mail]>  wrote:
> >> Of course, chairs being required to submit blue sheets is not the
same as attendees being required to sign them.
> >
> > They’re required to sign them in physical meetings. How are virtual
interims different?
>
> This *feels* like it should be true. But I can't find any definitive
> statement that requires attendees to sign blue sheets. Maybe I'm just
> overlooking it?

Benson

As Brian pointed out earlier, RFC2418 makes the reporting of attendees a
'should'.  The most recent IESG statement
http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/interim-meetings.html
says
"The minutes, including a list of attendees, must be sent to
[e-mail] within 10 days after the meeting, conference call
or jabber session concludes."

I note the 'must'.

And there is a webpage

http://www.ietf.org/documents/interim-meeting-blue-sheet-f2f.pdf

although there is no statement as to whether the use of this document is
a must, should, or something else!  So in terms of participants signing,
I do not see a requirement, but in terms of participants being reported,
I do.  And I would link this to 'Note Well' which warns participants
that their participation may be a matter of public record and so
whatever technology is used for a virtual interim, it should ensure that
participants see the 'Note Well' in some form.

And I would like to see that '10 days' modified, to be either 10 days or
three days prior to the next meeting to cover the case I see of weekly
meetings, when 10 days later is too late IMO.

Tom Petch

> Cheers,
> -Benson