Re: Remote only meetings? [Re: Concerns about Singapore]

[<[e-mail]>]

Melinda Shore <[e-mail]> writes:

> On 4/12/16 3:57 AM, [e-mail] wrote:
>> Rich Kulawiec <[e-mail]> writes:
>>> Because it works exclusively for the elite, privileged few.  (And no
>>> doubt: it works quite well.)  But it's the antithesis of inclusion
>>> and diversity -- and I think those qualities are increasingly necessary.
>>
>> But this is not how the IETF operates.
>
> Actually, it's very much how the IETF operates in practice,
> particularly with meeting participation becoming increasingly
> expensive and with increased participation from "standards
> professionals."  If you've been to meetings you'll have
> noticed some chairs taking votes in meetings (rather than
> relying on consensus processes) and saying that they'll
> ratify or confirm that decision on the mailing list (if
> they remember - sometimes they don't).

I know for a fact it is not how I and my co-chair run the IS-IS WG. I
can't speak to whether other WGs are being run incorrectly. It's the
responsibility of the participants and the ADs to make sure the
chairs are not violating our own standards process though.

Thanks,
Chris.