Re: Process issue -was- Re: weekly teleconference time

I find Evan's case compelling.

There may be a need, in this case, for:
a) some indication of how much of a problem we have with telecon times 
before the F2F (often the most contentious issue in a WG!)
b) a decision about the date and time of our first telecon (which may 
need to be decided at the F2F)

But the wider decision about our regular slot, can, and as Evan argues, 
probably should, be given a little longer.

I think billing the poll as a straw poll, rather than a formal poll, 
would have helped. (I think procedurally that it is not a formal vote)

Jeremy


Evan Wallace wrote:
> 
> I am at a meeting and don't have my W3C account information with me to 
> respond to the poll.  Furthermore, we are seeing a pattern of short lead 
> times for these kinds of requests which I find unacceptable.  You need 
> to allow at least two weeks for this kind of thing to account for 
> vacations, travel, and other conditions that can prevent wg-members from 
> reponding immediately.  Now that we are beyond the chartering stage, 
> let's establish standard procedures that allow wider participation of 
> the members in wg decisions.  I propose we adopt this "two week rule" as 
> one such standard procedure.
> 
> -Evan
> 
> Sandro Hawke wrote:
>> There's a poll up now where people can indicate their preferred times
>> for our weekly meetings.  
>>   http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/38457/telecon-time/
>>
>> The deadline is Sunday night (six days from now), but please answer as
>> soon as possible.   If you don't expect to join the meeting on a
>> regular basis, please submit the poll anyway with "no opinion"
>> selected for each candidate time.
>>
>>        -- sandro
>>
>>
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 7 December 2005 15:05:08 UTC