IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Solutions] Re: [mpowr] Re: Quality Control and that nasty A word

David Meyer <dmm@1-4-5.net> Wed, 17 December 2003 19:03 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA26683 for <mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:03:30 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AWgwo-0001ri-OD for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:03:03 -0500
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hBHJ32WT007170 for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:03:02 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AWgwo-0001rZ-Hf for mpowr-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:03:02 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA26676 for <mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:02:59 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AWgwm-00046E-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:03:00 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AWgwl-000467-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:02:59 -0500
Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AWgwl-000463-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:02:59 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AWgwm-0001qu-Ua; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:03:00 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AWgvt-0001qI-Ac for mpowr@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:02:05 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA26656 for <mpowr@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:02:02 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AWgvr-00044m-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:02:03 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AWgvq-00044e-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:02:02 -0500
Received: from m106.maoz.com ([205.167.76.9]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AWgvp-00044K-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:02:01 -0500
Received: from m106.maoz.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by m106.maoz.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id hBHJ1SIx017050; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 11:01:28 -0800
Received: (from dmm@localhost) by m106.maoz.com (8.12.10/8.12.8/Submit) id hBHJ1S9k017049; Wed, 17 Dec 2003 11:01:28 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: m106.maoz.com: dmm set sender to dmm@1-4-5.net using -f
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 11:01:28 -0800
From: David Meyer <dmm@1-4-5.net>
To: Alex Conta <aconta@txc.com>
Cc: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>, MPowr <mpowr@ietf.org>, solutions@alvestrand.no
Subject: Re: [Solutions] Re: [mpowr] Re: Quality Control and that nasty A word
Message-ID: <20031217190128.GA16958@1-4-5.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312171855430.31695-100000@netcore.fi> <3FE0A58B.9050908@txc.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3FE0A58B.9050908@txc.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
X-public-key: http://www.1-4-5.net/~dmm/public-key.asc
X-philosophy: "I just had to let it go" -- John Lennon
Sender: mpowr-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: mpowr-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: mpowr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr>, <mailto:mpowr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Management Positions -- Oversight, Work and Results <mpowr.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:mpowr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpowr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr>, <mailto:mpowr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60

	Alex,

>> If the WG chairs being the last resort should not be a concern, it means 
>> no one is interested in the work of that WG, so the WG should be 
>> disbanded, and the work filed as it is - incomplete work, could be 
>> resumed later, if interest revives.

	While I agree that in a perfect (maybe different) world,
	this could be true. In addition, you might make a similar
	assertion when consensus can't be reached (notably: "No
	one cares enough about this problem to compromise on a
	solution" or similar). However, the reality is somewhat
	different. In the former case (WG chairs as last resort),
	there are just too many issues surrounding how authors 
	work in a volunteer organization to make such a
	(categorical) statement.

	In fact, one of the jobs of a WG chair (IMO) is to manage
	and (frequently overlooked, but equally important) mentor
	the WG's authors. 

	Dave
	

_______________________________________________
mpowr mailing list
mpowr@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email