Hi Robin,
OK. It's not clear how the group is supposed to coordinate these analyses. Who wants to step forward and be one one of the official party-poopers of a proposal, asking for others to join them? (I volunteer to collaborate on critical analyses of LISP and TIDR - the only two proposals which I think have a hope of being adopted.)
Just like that. ;-)
What if no-one cares enough about a proposal to read it comprehensively and write an analysis?
Then that by itself will be an indication.
Since our goal is to choose the best proposal, I don't see how we can avoid thinking and presumably writing about other proposals.
Well, it's your choice as to what you do with your word count.
OK - I understand this process for the counterpoints. I am not clear how you want people to self-organise the "analysis" stage. Do you want draft or final "analyses" to be sent to the list? I think that would be a good way to further discussion and prompt other people to become involved in contributing to a better analysis if they feel those posted to the list could be improved upon.
The final version should be sent to the list. This will enable rebuttal to begin immediately.
There are no deadlines yet for the final two states of that, and no guidance yet from you or Lixia on how we will develop a recommendation before early March.
As I think I mentioned previously, we are proposing a deadline every three weeks.
Tony _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
