Re: Interim meetings - changing the way we work

[Nico Williams <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Benson Schliesser
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> Ted Lemon wrote:
>> we in fact do do work during f2f meetings, and the rule is "confirm
>> on the mailing list."   If working groups are not following that same
>> practice during interim meetings, they are doing it wrong.
>
> I agree with this. In particular, I think the best mindset is that a WG's
> mailing list is the authoritative record. Decisions that happen in any sort
> of meeting are tentative until they find their way to the mailing list.
> (BTW: I think this helps avoid the dependence on having great minutes taken
> by volunteers, and the inevitable disappointment that brings.)


Yes, but a record that a concall or other interim meeting took place,
and who attended, even if there are incomplete or missing minutes, is
important for IPR reasons.  Ensuring that such meetings are NOTE WELL
meetings is (should be) a priority, and that includes ensuring that a
record of that much exists.

Ideally the concalls and other interims would be recorded.

(Occasionally I've had to go back and listen to the recording of a WG
meeting at an IETF meeting.  It's very convenient that they exist at
all.  But they are also useful from a legal point of view, I'm sure,
and surely the same would be true of concalls and other interims, but
perhaps a recording requirement would be too onerous today?)

Nico
--