I really enjoyed the TPAC in Nov. and am interested in another F2F. Seeing
as how I live in the bay area I will gladly attend.
--
Carlos Cardona
831*454*8785
JAH Love Eternal
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Ennals, Robert <robert.ennals@intel.com>
> wrote:
> > [At the risk of bringing up an old debate]
> >
> >
> > I think it depends on what you want to do at an F2F.
> >
> > I agree with Ian that a face to face meeting is typically a bad place to
> make decisions. You don't have the luxury of building up evidence and
> thinking about things, not everyone is there, and one can feel pressure to
> rush things.
> >
> > OTOH I think a face to face meeting can be a great way to get a better
> understanding of who everyone is, what their world-view is, why they think
> what they do, etc, which can make it easier to resolve conflicts and make
> decisions on the mail lists later. I find that a quick one-on-one
> conversation with someone can tell me much more about what their position
> really is than a long public email discussion.
>
> Agreed. Mailing lists are indeed the best way to resolve things when
> everybody's familiar with each other. FtF, though, makes it much
> easier to branch out and cross group boundaries, and just get a
> general feel for who other people are. I gained enormous benefit from
> meeting everyone at TPAC this last November, and talking with people
> from other WGs.
>
> I also second the idea that these meetings be focused more on
> crosstalk and discussion, without any focus on decision making.
>
> ~TJ
>
> ~TJ
>
>