On Monday, February 13, 2012 07:09:20 PM Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Monday, February 13, 2012 06:05:25 PM Barry Leiba wrote:
> > A couple of weeks ago-ish, I started working-group last call on the
> > 
> > subject document, and said this:
> > > Please do not
> > > wait until the last minute, and especially do not wait until the
> > > document goes to the IESG.  You will be beaten with a rubber
> > > truncheon.
> > 
> > It seems that I do need to get out my truncheon.
> > 
> > John Levine and Steve Atkins did, indeed, wait until the last minute.
> > Despite participation in the last-call conversation, they provided
> > *major* edits to the editor (1) off list, and (2) after WGLC ended.
> > 
> > Now, I'm not one to hold a line, at least not at this point, and say
> > that we won't consider useful input because an arbitrary deadline
> > wasn't met.  At the same time, this sort of behaviour is abusive to
> > the working group.  It abuses process, it abuses the chair's desire to
> > accommodate all reasonable input, and, most significantly, it shows a
> > complete lack of respect for the time and effort of the other
> > participants.  We spent ten days hashing out what some thought were
> > the final details of an almost-done document, only to find that a
> > couple of participants thought it proper to do significant rewrites at
> > the last minute and without discussing them with the group.
> > 
> > Everyone:  My interest in accommodating everyone's input and allowing
> > for busy schedules that include things other than MARF participation
> > is getting a bit frayed.
> > 
> > I consider that the AS document is back to "active document" state.
> > We will continue discussing it.  We will come to rough consensus on
> > all, some, or none of the recent changes.  WHen we've decided where
> > the working group as a collective roughitude stands on it, we will
> > re-do working-group last call.  And we will expect that discussion
> > will quickly converge so that we can send this to the IESG before the
> > Paris IETF meeting.
> > 
> > And we will NOT do this sort of thing again.
> > 
> > Barry, as increasingly annoyed chair
> 
> OK.  I've invested all the time I intend to invest in this draft within the
> working group.  I'll read it again when it hits IETF last call then.  I
> don't have time for this.

I've gone back and re-read Barry's mail and while I'm frustrated, I'm backing 
off from my last statement.  You've got my review of the proposed changeset.  
It's got a few things worth using, but on the whole, I think it worsens the 
document.

Scott K
_______________________________________________
marf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf

Reply via email to