[mpowr] Re: [Solutions] Further work on WG (chair) roles - MPOWR WG proposal

[Alex Conta <[e-mail]>]

I watched the mike, and spoke with other IETFers during the plenary - 
not Scott - most of whom have been around for quite some time, and with 
no exception I heard more concerns than agreement.

So many expressing concerns is too many. It is far from any consensus I 
have seen in IETF.

Alex

Scott Bradner wrote:
>>I wasn't at the Thursday evening plenary, but the minutes
>>indicate that 60% of the people in the room thought that the
>>WG Chairs proposal was a good idea, 10% thought it was a=20
>>bad idea and 10% didn't know.
> 
> 
> lets just say that I disagree with the idea that anywhere that
> % of the folks in the room expressed WG chairs proposal was
> a "good idea" - so far I have found almost no one who thought that
> the specific proposal was a good idea - only 2 or 3 people said they
> did at the mike - the rest expessed varing degrees of objection
> 
> I do think that most people thought that talking about the issue 
> was a good idea
> 
> but let get some others say what they saw
> 
> Scott
> _______________________________________________
> Solutions mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://eikenes.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/solutions
> 
>