Harald, Even a simpler solution. If you (meaning Iljitsch) had serious conflicts, then let the WG chairs know about these conficts. They may may not on the WG Chairs' radars. That has happened to me, where WG members were overlapping with groups that I was unaware of.
John On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Harald Tveit Alvestrand < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Diving into solutions space.... > > The WG scheduling tool has 3 lists of "groups to avoid conflicts with", > 1st, 2nd and 3rd priority. > > I don't know if these are visible to anyone but the requesting WG Chair, > but they're listed on the confirmation notice from the tool; I've made > it a practice to copy them to the WG I schedule, and modify the list > according to comments. > > So I'd ask: > > Were the meetings you had problems with listed in each others' conflicts > list? > - If not, it's a problem at the "data input" level. > - If yes, it's a problem at the "conflicts resolutions" level. > > The solution to the problem depends on where the problem is, of course. > > (Note: Conflicts at some level are unavoidable. Even bad conflicts. But > if we can give the secretariat good data to figure out what those > conflicts are, we're one step ahead.) > > Harald > > >
_______________________________________________ IETF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
