Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B10D9E6A@SUS-MA1IT01> From: "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@rational.com> To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 18:14:44 -0400 Subject: RE: Versioning TeleConf Time Change? I'm inclined to use the following process: - anyone can propose a new time for the call - anyone can veto a proposed new time for the call We'll change the time of the call if any proposed new time is not veto'ed. So far, I've gotten two new proposed times: 10am-EST and 11am-EST JimD has veto'ed 10am-EST JimA: did you want to veto 11am-EST, or did you just want to try out 10am-EST first? Cheers, Geoff -----Original Message----- From: Jim Doubek [mailto:jdoubek@macromedia.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 5:56 PM To: Clemm, Geoff; ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org Subject: RE: Versioning TeleConf ... 2pm-3pm EST Being a west-coaster, 8 (11 Eastern) is ok with me, but 7 is not. - jim -----Original Message----- From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 1:44 PM To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org Subject: RE: Versioning TeleConf ... 2pm-3pm EST 11am EST would of course be 8am on the west coast. Would this be a problem for the west coast folks? As for Jim Amsden's suggestion for 10am EST, this would be 7am west coast time, which I find unlikely to be very popular (:-). But I'll let the west coast folks comment on that. Cheers, Geoff -----Original Message----- From: Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com [mailto:Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 5:01 AM To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org Subject: Versioning TeleConf ... 2pm-3pm EST I realize that (a) the teleconf has become something of an institution, and (b) I represent a low percentage of the participants ... but if people are indifferent to the traditional time that this call is scheduled I'd like to have it moved earlier in the day (since I am now at EST+5hrs). An ideal time for me would be 11am EST. Tim