On 10/03/2013 14:35, Scott Brim wrote: > On 03/10/13 09:12, Brian Trammell allegedly wrote: >>> Solve it with better management, not artificial barriers that are >>> imposed on everyone and that can be trivially routed around, albeit >>> without the benefits of using the I-D mechanism. > >> This seems like something that could be left to the discretion of the >> chairs on setting the agenda for each WG meeting, as long as there's >> transparency in the criteria that will be used to decide whether a >> recently-submitted draft can be discussed on the agenda. > > Yes, place the decision in the WGs. Once upon a time in a WG far away > we did say "You can submit drafts and discuss them on the mailing list > any time you want, but the agenda for the meeting will be set two weeks > in advance."
Please don't. Currently we receive a flood of a few hundred drafts two weeks before each meeting, which gives time for some triage. I do not wish to receive a few hundred drafts on the first day of the meeting, with no time for triage, but that would be the inevitable end-point if the deadline was abolished. (Unless there has been an unannounced change in human nature, of course.) Brian
