Re: How we are being silently manipulated - a fresh example - Was: Re: QT4CG meeting 120 draft minutes, 6 May 2025

Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@gmail.com> writes:
> I have already provided the facts of what happened - how important information was withheld from the participants in the meeting,

Dimitre, speaking as the chair of the CG, I must ask you to please stop making inflamatory statements. Please do not ascribe malice without evidence.

We are all volunteers, working together across half a world of timezones in an effort to improve a technology that’s core to our working lives. We have collectively invested well over 1,000 person-hours in this exercise *in meetings alone* and likely ten times that number creating issues, writing comments, drafting PRs, writing tests, responding to comments, and implementing the languages. Our efforts are predicated on the belief that we are all acting in good faith. And I believe that.

To speak of manipulation, deceit, witholding information, and lying is not simply counter productive to forming consensus for a position, it is disrespectful and offensive. Please stop.

> the participants must have read in advance the PR and be informed about this particular issue.

Yes. I expect CG members to have read the PRs before the meeting. I recognize that that is not always the case. I have on some occasions myself done little more than skim them. If, under such circumstances, I fail to notice an aspect of a proposal to which I would have objected, that responsibility sits entirely on my own shoulders.

> Raising a PR just a few days before the meeting and requiring everyone to have read all the text in detail.

In general:

I am attempting to follow long-standing W3C practice as I understand it. The rule is, I believe, that that agendas for working group meetings must be published at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting. (A week in advance for face-to-face meetings, IIRC.)

If the CG feels that 24 hours notice is insufficient, I am happy to entertain proposals for alternatives. I can post the agendas on Friday, if the CG would prefer. 

A request to defer an item until the next meeting so that the group has more time to read and discuss it is always in order. It has happened before and it may happen again. It is always accepted without prejudice.

With respect to the particular PR being discussed in this thread:

Not only was it discussed in at least two consecutive weeks of meetings, it was created on 16 March. You opened a related PR on 24 March. By any measure, the CG has had more than a few days to read it.

Respectfully,

Norm Tovey-Walsh
Chair, XQuery and XSLT Extensions Community Group

Received on Thursday, 8 May 2025 08:48:50 UTC