Re: moving forward—with a plan

Hi Tom,

Just to add another perspective on this point:

>> We could see this as a sign we need to resurrect that thread, but I
>> doubt this is what's really needed. What I think we need is a
>> different way of managing the Hydra effort altogether. Perhaps we
>> need weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly calls. Perhaps we need a steering
>> committee or dedicated task force.
> 
> I would not like to see Hydra go the way you propose. I fear the such
> cyclical meetings and some kind of task force would actually drive
> people away. This completely loses the openness and gives the impression
> that there is some closed group of dissidents pulling the strings. What
> we need is an open community which will contribute ideas and their needs.

There's a tension between openness and commitment,
and we need to find the right balance.

There would of course not be a closed group pulling strings.
Everybody would be free to join any initiative,
but efforts would require more commitment than others
(and commitment is something I think we need).

For instance, there could be a group of people
who commit to a bigger time investment,
such as participating in periodic calls, and hence,
also be able to influence the decision process more
because they are present at these meetings.
This does not seem unfair to me:
if you really care deeply about an issue,
you need to invest the time in it as well.

This would not change the openness of the community.
Also, this is the model typical W3C working groups follow.

Best,

Ruben

Received on Sunday, 22 May 2016 17:31:45 UTC