grenville armitage wrote: > > Brian E Carpenter wrote: > > > [...] as I read it, it was to take the > > discussion to an ad hoc WG after exposing the issue on the main list. > > How is that different from exposing an issue on the 'main list' > and then telling people to subscribe-to/jump-to poisson for > continued discussion? > > What's to stop these ad hoc WGs from ending being populated only > by people interested in process discussions anyway? Seems like > we'll be back to the purported problem with poisson, but with more > mailing list creation/removal overhead.
Well, that is an experimental question. My feeling is that if a specific process question comes up - let's say, a proposal to increase IAB membership to 99 seats, to create a silly example - we could have a much more focussed discussion in the "iab99" WG with a very limited charter than has proved possible in recent years in Poisson. And really that is the only change that Harald has proposed, when you drill down. Brian
