[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kerry Miller) wrote:
> Maybe (again) I have used the wrong word. What would it take to
> loosen the concept of 'meeting' from the temporal constraints/
> intensity/ concentration your response seems to imply?
I wasn't trying to imply anything.
I envision that under ideal conditions, there are a number of ways
that on and offline forums might be used to discuss the various issues
that are brought up here, with particpants moving freely amongst any
and all of them. I do think the overall goals of the forums need to
be defined.
The IETF model seems to work well for the work that the IETF does, but
that model does not seem to work where ICANN is concerned.
> Does one think differently when one is in a hurry?
Yes, because they believe they have to act quickly to prevent
something from happening or continuing to happen. Several people such
as Dave Crocker and Jim Dixon have expressed their opinions on what
activities need to be prevented or discontinued.
> Is there a difference between publicizing a meeeting and working out
> an agenda?
Yes. Ideally, one would work out an agenda before publicizing
meetings, so the meetings followed the agenda, and participants would
have time to consider the issues beforehand.
> (If that's too vague, take the converse: is the frustration and
> aimlessness of IFWP due to its not working to a 'deadline' -- or to
> its not having any other structure than the endless scroll?)
Beyond what I said before (I think it is due to ICANN not living up to
the requirements of the White Paper), I don't know. Anyone else want
to comment?
--gregbo
