RE: Barely literate minutes

"Lee Howard" <lee@asgard.org> Thu, 29 November 2012 21:45 UTC

Return-Path: <lee@asgard.org>
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 CD50221F8C69 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 13:45:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.367
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.367 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.232, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 y1LlYkFcyQQy for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 13:45:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from atl4mhob13.myregisteredsite.com (atl4mhob13.myregisteredsite.com [209.17.115.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42A6821F8C61 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 13:45:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailpod.hostingplatform.com (mail.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.50]) by atl4mhob13.myregisteredsite.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id qATLjUFl008153 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Nov 2012 16:45:30 -0500
Received: (qmail 3059 invoked by uid 0); 29 Nov 2012 21:45:30 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO HDC00042402) (lee@asgard.org@204.235.115.165) by 0 with ESMTPA; 29 Nov 2012 21:45:30 -0000
From: "Lee Howard" <lee@asgard.org>
To: "'Barry Leiba'" <barryleiba@computer.org>, "'IETF discussion list'" <ietf@ietf.org>
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> <CAC4RtVAG+pKSQMwPyB6GJ7jxJM4hNpU81Yt8he6ZsEMrg_rTbQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC4RtVAG+pKSQMwPyB6GJ7jxJM4hNpU81Yt8he6ZsEMrg_rTbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: RE: Barely literate minutes
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 16:45:29 -0500
Message-ID: <00c001cdce7a$d9fa6490$8def2db0$@asgard.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQGuCiyth3j9q+DAiXDkQJ8JXg2BkwHLVCNwAgpNoc8BQtQrvQGJGIMNAV4GQ9QBkXXqWgFZnJuFAbM55QuX2/G4YA==
Content-Language: en-us
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
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 21:45:32 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Barry Leiba
> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 10:12 AM
> To: IETF discussion list
> Subject: Re: Barely literate minutes
> 
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
wrote:
> ...
> > chair needs to (with the help of minutes takers and other
> > participants) post detailed notes of the discussion to the list and
> > ask for objections. That serves two functions: (a) It makes a record
> > of work that was done; and (b) it gives people who don't attend
> > meetings (including new folks who come
> > along) a chance to participate and voice their concerns. *Achievement*
> > of consensus might have to occur f2f for some issues in some WGs, but
> > it seems to me that *assessment* of consensus must be completely
> > possible on the list, even if the only poster to the list is the chair
> > with all of the f2f notes.
> 
> What I would prefer to see is that in addition to minutes there be
separate messages posted to
> the list for each document, detailing the discussion of that document in
the meeting and the
> changes that will result from the discussion.  That can be posted by the
chair, but I'd really
> expect it to come from a document editor.  That makes sure that everyone
can see what the
> document editor heard and intends to do with the document, and allows the
working group to
> continue the discussion or say, "Yes, that's what we heard as well, and
it's fine."

As a document author, I've learned that I need to have a friend take good
notes for me, because
all of the great comments I get at the mike are lost otherwise.  I can't
take notes while I'm
standing up, facilitating discussion.

As a working group chair I take my own notes, as backup to the note-taker,
then merge the
notes.

Lee