MIXER example (mailing list size/activity)

[Spencer Dawkins]

Ummm, I suppose zero-based chartering (IESG decides what WGs to
KEEP after every meeting) is out of the question?

I'm not saying that summary executions always have a saluatory
effect, but having a one-meeting warning cycle that says "IESG
doesn't really believe your current milestones, if you're not
back on track by the next meeting, your WG page moves to the
Concluded Workgroups page" might be motivating...

At the very least, it would give us a different set of problems
to talk about!

Spencer

--- James Kempf <kempf at docomolabs-usa.com> wrote:
> Keith,
> 
> FWIW, I support pruning of WGs that are not making progress,
> or otherwise
> reorganizing (like giving the parts of the work that need to
> be done to other
> groups if that makes sense). I think the WG process needs to
> be managed, and one
> aspect of management is pruning when stuff doesn't get done.
> People need to be
> clear about why the work is being terminated, and they need to
> be given enough
> warnings, perhaps a formal review, all of which takes up the
> AD's time. Perhaps
> that's the key issue.
> 
>             jak

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
http://webhosting.yahoo.com