ineffective use of meeting time

[Steve Silverman]

I have to point out that when someone asks how many people have read
this draft,
the typical response is that 3 or 4 % of the people have read the
document.  The vast majority are "tourists".
Yes, everyone has to opportunity to read the draft.  But a dozen
drafts come out every day and
some of us have other duties in addition to reading drafts.  The
reading burden is an overload.
As someone with experience in several other
standards bodies, the quality of discussion when proponents have to
explain a proposal and sell it is generally
much higher than is the norm in the IETF.  It seems to me that many
proposals are simply not read by anyone and
move thru the WG because nobody wants to say no. This can happen
elsewhere but it is harder when the burden of justification includes
presenting a story that makes sense.  Obviously, such explication and
discussion takes time and I'm not sure how this is handled within the
IETF constraints but I think there is already too little explanation
rather than too little.

Steve Silverman

> -----Original Message-----
> From: problem-statement-bounces at alvestrand.no
> [mailto:problem-statement-bounces at alvestrand.no]On Behalf
> Of Ted Lemon
> Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 2:44 PM
> To: Keith Moore
> Cc: problem-statement at alvestrand.no
> Subject: Re: ineffective use of meeting time
>
>
> > consider the ratio of presentation time to discussion time.
>
> So you're saying that we should just have each item on the
> agenda and
> only do a Q&A session, with no presentation?   I kind of
> like that idea.
>
>