Re: Process CG process question - was RE: Agenda Process Document Task Force Tuesday, 2 June 2015

- jeff@, Michael.Champion@, szilles@

01.06.2015, 22:51, "David Singer" <>:
>>  On Jun 1, 2015, at 12:28 , Jeff Jaffe <> wrote:
>>  I think we have a larger issue than just the scheduling of the meetings.  We have not gotten engagement that all of the changes we are proposing are worth doing.
> Also, we schedule to allow Asian reps to attend, but do we get many? Though I suppose changing it so that they are *less* likely to attend is also sub-optimal.

Hmm. If you think of "midnight or so" as "to allow people to attend"…

>>  We just completed a ballot for Process2015.  19 AC Members favored the changes and there were 4 Formal Objections.  Well over 300 AC Members chose not to vote.  There is an AB call in two weeks, and the AB will need to decide how to proceed.  Given the tiny participation and the quantity of objections it is not obvious that there is sufficient consensus to move forward.
>>  To those of us who are active in this activity, we need to work hard to make sure that we are making changes that are valued by the constituency.
> Agreed.
> But I can’t tell whether it’s “don’t care either way” or “seems competently handled, ignore it” or “this is minor staff, who cares?”. I think this year’s cleanup was mostly in the last of these, apart from the one change that got 4 FOs.  Though I am surprised that a change that got 4 FOs did not get a reasonable number of other votes.

We aimed to make simple, non-controversial changes. It seems we got that wrong on one count, but perhaps we did what we set out to do. The response rate seems in line with chartering work, even before you factor out the fact that W3C staff now routinely write to individuals asking for votes on charters...

>>  On 6/1/2015 3:22 PM, Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
>>>  There has been pretty limited participation on this call for the last few months, which is at 7am Pacific and late evening in East Asia.  Is it time to consider a more “asynchronous decision making” mode for this CG?

I've been asking that we do that for a long time. I still think we should be doing it. (It's not relevant to the CG as a whole which, although it rarely does more than host the AB's TF, already *has* an asynchronous decision-making mode.)

>>>  From: Stephen Zilles []
>>>  The call is on Tuesday, 2 June, 2015 at  14:00-15:00 UTC (10:00am-11:00am Boston local)
>>>  Zakim Bridge +1.617.761.6200, conference code 7762 ("PROC")
>>>  IRC Channel: #w3process
>>>  For residents of other (typical) time zones the start times were:
>>>  Pacific:  7:00
>>>  Eastern US: 10:00
>>>  Central Europe: 15:00

That is 16:00 in Central Europe.


Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex - - - Find more at

Received on Monday, 1 June 2015 23:55:33 UTC