Re: [rtcweb] Proposed Video Selection Process

On Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:46:46 -0800
Peter Dunkley <peter.dunkley@crocodilertc.net> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I am sure there are many people on the blue sheets who have never
> participated on any of the mailing lists.  My point is that to be fair (and
> as this is controversial it must be fair) if they get a vote because they
> showed up in person those of us who showed up online should get a vote too.
> 

Considering that a considerable part of the attendance at the last RTCWEB meeting session was made of people who didn't even know what RTCWEB was, I can't but agree with you.

Lorenzo

> I am based in the UK, so the late in the day meetings at Vancouver were at
> incredibly anti-social times for me.  Still, it was important and I made
> the effort to stay up and participate in the only way I could.
> 
> There is also a consistency issue here.  Those of us on Jabber were able to
> (and encouraged to) participate in the consensus process, but it has been
> proposed that we be excluded from the vote.  Really, you should either be
> able to participate through Jabber or not in a consistent way.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
> 
> On 21 November 2013 11:37, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> wrote:
> > > On 11/21/13 10:56, Justin Uberti wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Following an IETF meeting on Jabber doesn't count as participating?
> > >>
> > >> The "big guy vs little guy" narrative continues...
> > >
> > >
> > > I think that's a bit specious. If someone is following the issue at such
> > a
> > > distance that they haven't expressed an opinion on the mailing list, I
> > can't
> > > see how taking a vote from them counts as anything other than simple,
> > > old-fashioned ballot stuffing.
> >
> > They might have just been active on the W3C webrtc list and watched
> > here to see what is happening with codecs, but haven't expressed their
> > position.
> >
> >
> > > I'll take it one step further. I find the prospect that we're allowing
> > blue
> > > sheets to stand in for participation to be highly questionable: letting
> > the
> > > tourists vote is weighting the opinion of demonstrably uninvolved (or
> > > less-involved) parties at the same level as those who have actually been
> > > working on the topic. I do not think that a blue-sheet sign in without
> > any
> > > on-list participation should be sufficient to participate in the kind of
> > > process the chairs are proposing.
> >
> > We could add that participation on the W3C webrtc list also qualifies.
> >
> >
> > > Or perhaps I'm missing something. Is there something about the
> > capabilities
> > > of "the little guy" that makes sending an email an unrealistically high
> > > barrier to entry?
> >
> > To address the little guys even more, we could also add that
> > participation on the discuss-webrtc list also qualifies.
> >
> > Just my 2c worth.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Silvia.
> > _______________________________________________
> > rtcweb mailing list
> > rtcweb@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Peter Dunkley
> Technical Director
> Crocodile RCS Ltd

-- 
Lorenzo Miniero, COB

Meetecho s.r.l.
Web Conferencing and Collaboration Tools
http://www.meetecho.com