On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 06:41:55PM +, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
This is a much-overdue follow up to this poll, which got 17 responses.
snip
So, though it saddens me, I would like to propose that we change back to a
single meeting time effective the week following our midcycle (Aug
This is a much-overdue follow up to this poll, which got 17 responses.
TL;DR:
The poll indicated that most responders did not personally find the 0500
meeting helpful. Reviewing the meeting logs for the last six months shows
significantly lower core attendance in those meetings. Informal
On 11 May 2015 at 18:39, Devananda van der Veen devananda@gmail.com
wrote:
Lucas inspired me to take a look at the raw numbers ... so I hacked up a
little python to digest all our meeting logs since we made the switch to
alternating times.
in particular, I'd like to point out the number
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Ruby Loo rlooya...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe the question is better posed to those folks -- was it useful or not?
And if not, why? Because the date/time still didn't work, or because not
enough (or the right persons) weren't there so their issues of interest
Lucas inspired me to take a look at the raw numbers ... so I hacked up a
little python to digest all our meeting logs since we made the switch to
alternating times.
in particular, I'd like to point out the number of meetings with less than
half of our core review team present, ie, where we didn't
