This has been an interesting experience......wg-review. I can understand why
many have dropped out.
I believe in that if you want to have something down, that you ask the
busiest person you know. They know how to budget their time and thus get
things done. This group surely takes that and more.
BUT, this work group is almost impossible. I have several concerns:
1) Many emails are very personal in nature - flaming each other and not
sticking to the issues. This increases the about of reading immensely.
2) The discussions can only be likened to 30 people in a conference room
where there are 10 different topics being discussed simultaneously, with
people on the opposite ends of the room.
3) The lack of structure, policy, and direction makes this process
4) The few people that are left in this group cannot be called
representative of the Internet. This consensus (sorry) is not useful.
Think about it, we publish a report...make a statement. The someone does
not like it - they have the option of negating everything we say because
this groups is a small contingent that could no way represent the Internet
as a whole.
I think our work is vital, but we need to model ourselves on standard
business processes. Some ideas - set agenda's, have focus group/moderated
discussions, set interim goals so we know when we have accomplished
something - not goalss like "get the report done," develop sub-committees
that discuss particular topics then bring the issues back to the full group
for a discussion, employ better collaborative technologies. We have to do
I am willing to help, get involved, get more people involved, but we need to
organize this WG.
This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html