W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > September 2012

Re: Next telco webrtc

From: Maire Reavy <mdr@reavy.org>
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2012 10:35:49 -0400
Message-ID: <504A0645.6070709@reavy.org>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
I agree that publishing a short summary of the decisions (perhaps along 
with a couple of reasons of how we came to those decisions if they were 
contested or controversial) and any action items the group agreed to to 
the list would be incredibly helpful.

Couldn't we also record the call?  I've heard such technology exists.  ;-)

Instead of someone not being able to participate because they were too 
busy taking minutes, they could participate in the call and write the 
minutes afterwards.

-Maire

On 9/7/2012 10:13 AM, Jim Barnett wrote:
> Just a personal opinion on meeting minutes.  We spend a lot of time
> looking for a minute taker who in turn frantically tries to write down
> what everyone is saying - yet, as Cullen says, the results are pretty
> much useless.  It would be easier and at least as useful to replace the
> minutes with a short summary of the decisions that were actually made
> (or explicitly deferred, etc.)
>
> - Jim
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cullen Jennings (fluffy) [mailto:fluffy@cisco.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2012 9:56 AM
> To: Stefan Hakansson LK
> Cc: public-webrtc@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Next telco webrtc
>
>
> I'm not going to object to this any further than this one email but I
> think this is the wrong decision.
>
> When you compare the two leading dates
>
> one of them is missing one of the chair (but we do have two chairs for
> more or less that reason)
>
> the other date is missing 3 out of the 4 editors of the draft as well as
> the other key contributors
>
> I think that is the wrong tradeoff. I will note that the minutes
> produced from our meetings are totally useless so it it's not like
> people can read them and figure out what the conclusion of meeting were.
>
>
> I respect that the chairs have to sometime choose between two bad
> choices and there is always someone that things they made the wrong
> choice.  We have had far too many meetings where no useful conclusions
> were reached - I don't want this to be another one of those.
>
> I do have a very concrete suggestion to reduce this problem in the
> future - please please please, do not send out polls for a time that
> have more than 6 choices on them. When you send out something with 20
> choices on them, people can not possibly block out all the 20 on their
> calendar so they don't end up reserving all the spaces that could work -
> instead they just peanut butter spread across them in a random way and
> we don't really find out what works. We have seen this over and over
> again in these types of polls, less choices (but good and reasonable
> choices) result in more people being able to attend the leading day not
> less.
>
> On the topic of making the meeting actually result in useful
> conclusions, I strongly encourage the chairs to limit the topics such
> that enough time can be spend on the topics we do address to reach
> meaningful conclusions.
>
> Thanks for the rant, I feel better now
> Cullen
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 7, 2012, at 2:41 AM, Stefan Hakansson LK
> <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> the next telco will take place on
>>
>> *Sept 17th, 10pm - 11:30pm CEST*
>>
>> Please make a note in your calendar
>>
>> Stefan for the chairs
>>
>> P.S. If you check the Doodle poll result you will notice that the time
> picked was not the one with maximum availability. This is due to that we
> wanted both chairs to be able to attend, and also not push the meeting
> too far into the future
>
>
Received on Friday, 7 September 2012 14:36:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 7 September 2012 14:36:17 GMT