- From: Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 11:13:29 -0800
- To: Steven Adler <adler1@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>, DWBP Chairs <member-dwbp-chairs@w3.org>
Steve, Thank you for sharing your concerns, the last couple of meetings I looked at the clock and wondered where the time had gone :-) Just a few thoughts here, I'm wondering from a time management perspective: * put estimated time lengths for each discussion topic. (do we do this? I can't remember) * have a volunteer meeting time keeper who reminds us when we our discussions have gone over. * agree for more lengthy discussions to have a separate meeting or have the discussion continue in email. * Instead of having some meeting items in the agenda, start them in email and then summarize the outcome of the discussion in the meeting. * agreed about communicating actions status the night before Eric On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Steven Adler <adler1@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Last call, we spend 45 minutes talking about Zakim, actions, approving > minutes from the call prior, and Phil's latest (good) idea about preserving > data. We had a brief mention about the use case webinar from Palo Alto, but > it was about 5 minutes. In the last 15 minutes we had an interesting > exchange of views. But we never got through 2/3 of the planned agenda. > > I would like all of our calls to be at most 15 minutes on W3C Process and at > least 45 minutes exchanging views and discussing the agenda topics. > > Does anyone else feel this way and do we have any ideas on how we can reduce > process and increase communication? Can we approve last meetings minutes > via email vote prior to the next call? Can we communicate pending action > item status the night before the call? > > Lets discuss this via email. Looking forward to your thoughts. > > Best Regards, > > Steve > > Motto: "Do First, Think, Do it Agai
Received on Monday, 24 February 2014 19:13:57 UTC