Re: [rtcweb] Matthew's Objections: was Re: Straw Poll on Video Codec Alternatives

[Adam Roach <[e-mail]>]

On 12/10/13 16:33, Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE) wrote:
> Spending the Working Group's time on picking an MTI video codec at this point is just as disruptive to the vital work the WG needs to complete as it would be for me to stand in the corner of the next WG meeting continuously blowing a vuvuzela.

Then light a candle.

The working group is made of its participants, of which you are 
presumably one. Start a conversation about something else. I agree that 
there are other deliverables, and there's no reason we can't discuss and 
progress them in parallel with any codec-related discussions.

Start here; dive in anywhere:

http://tools.ietf.org/wg/rtcweb/

/a

____
P.S. FWIW, I think the chairs are doing a perfectly reasonable job under 
some of the most difficult circumstances I've seen in 16 years of IETF 
work. For the past couple of meeting cycles, the problem hasn't even 
been the codec discussions; it's been the hyperaggressive 
meta-conversations talking *about* the codec conversations. From that 
perspective, you *are* standing in the corner playing a vuvuzela as a 
member of a highly disruptive vuvuzela chorus. We formally have three 
chairs, which is already large for a working group. We really don't need 
the hundred or so participants to be back-seat chairs as well.