Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory

[Andrew Sullivan <[e-mail]>]

Dear colleagues,

On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 01:12:14PM -0700, Ted Hardie wrote:
> I personally hope that the categories end up somewhere along the lines:
> 
> Mandatory:  If not met, don't schedule the meeting here and move or cancel
> the meeting if the requirement ceases to be met.
> 
> Exception-required:  Confirm that these are met during scheduling or get
> community confirmation of the exception.
> 
> Important:  Things we care about but which can be traded off if the balance
> of requirements is met without confirmation by the full community.
> 
> Desired:  Things we like, but which can be dropped without having an impact
> on the meeting's effectiveness.

I quite like this set of requirements.  I do think there is utility in
maintaining a category of Mandatory that means exactly what the drafts
have said: if it can't be satisfied, then no meeting there.

In addition, I agree strongly with Ted's suggestion about crisp
"marching orders" for Madatory.  I think of the canonical case for
Mandatory is "enough meeting rooms".  If there aren't enough, we're
not going to have the meeting there, period.

This is why I don't like things like "Mandatory" for stuff like
"travel costs are acceptable".  I don't know how to operationalize
"acceptable" such that it is meaningful.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[e-mail]