dhc at dcrocker.net
Sun Jan 5 09:45:08 CET 2003
Monday, December 23, 2002, 11:42:22 AM, you wrote:
Joel> The assumption that long-winded working groups inevitably
It would be great if we could design a process that was infinitely flexible
and could adapt to every possible working group setting. However we are
unlikely to achieve that.
Therefore, if we argue for or against proposals based on individual examples
or exceptions, we will make no progress.
My own discussion tried to claim some *patterns*. A pattern does not
require correlation of 1.0. It does not require that there be no
exceptions. Rather it looks for dominant behavior. One might even call it
a rough consensus pattern.
My claim is that the *pattern* of IETF performance shows that excessive time
highly correlates with poor productivity and utility.
If we build a process that is tailored for the exception, we are likely to
retain the current IETF productivity problems. However that is not the IETF
folks seem to want. So the question is how to improve productivity without
losing the essential core to our process.
Dave <mailto:dhc at dcrocker.net>
Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
t +1.408.246.8253; f +1.408.850.1850
More information about the Problem-statement