Re: For Review: IESG Statement on Guidance on Face-to-Face and Virtual Interim Meetings

[Harald Alvestrand <[e-mail]>]

I'm happy to see Adrian pointing out that this is an update, not a de
novo policy.
I'm not so happy to see that the IESG didn't include this information
(and a "what's changed" summary) in the announcement.

Attached is a wdiff (with some line formatting added by me).

Important points:

- Formatting: Face-to-face and virtual meetings each get their own
bulleted list of requirements.
- More positive noises about mailing lists in the introduction.
- Acknowledgement that some WGs hold bi-weekly or even weekly interims
- An expectation that virtual interims will become more commonplace over
time
- A statement that the rules in this statmement "must be obeyed"
- New rules for approving extended sequences of virtual meetings
- Virtual meetings get shorter timelines (4->1 week for announcement,
2->1 week for agenda)
- Uploading to the datatracker of minutes get mentioned

The biggest deal seems to me to be that virtual meetings in series
(right up to weekly!!!!) are now a blessed IETF procedure.

Personally, I feel that weekly meetings can be *very* effective - but
they are also *very* exclusionary. The number of people in a working
group who can tolerate another weekly phone call in the average working
group is likely counted on one hand - perhaps two if the WG is intensely
popular - and these will usually be the people who are already full time
committed to the design that is being pursued.

My impression is that we should call these meetings "editor meetings",
"design team meetings" or something else - but expecting a *WG* to show
up at weekly phonecalls is a Really Bad Idea, and we shouldn't encorage
more WGs adopting such a practice.

Harald