Subject: WG Deluge & Focus

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 15:21:00 -0500

Ive been silent for the past week due to 2 reasons: Ive had Real Work 
obligations that take most of my time (since they pay the salary I have to 
focus on it when they need me to) and the sheer volume of traffic in the 
past week or so.

  Ive seen several thread get 10+ layers deep with several concurrent 
sub-threads/digressions going on.  I for one find the volume overwhelming 
and the lack of focus on the threads issue(s) a deterrent to engaging (at 
least until things get a bit quieter on the list).

  In order to both reengage folks (besides myself even) and to make some 
more visible and constructive progress on CAP, Id like to suggest that we 
A) try to keep our digressions in threads down (self censorship here works 
wonders) and B) try to resolve 1 issue before turning our focus onto 
others.  This should help us with our forward momentum on CAP and 
resolving the issues that we have in the queue.

Bruce
===========================================================================
Bruce Kahn                                INet: 
[email-masked]
Messaging & Collaboration                 Phone: 978.399.6496
IBM Software Group                         FAX: and nothing but the FAX...
Standard disclaimers apply, even where prohibited by law...

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 12:13:39 -0500

[email-masked] directly replied on 02/19/2002 09:26:19 PM:
> > sub-threads/digressions going on.  I for one find the volume
> > overwhelming and the lack of focus on the threads issue(s) a deterrent
> > to engaging (at least until things get a bit quieter on the list).
> 
> Bruce, have you followed any other WG. We are *mild* compared
> to them.

The point is that _we_ tend to digress on deep threads and diverge from 
concensus.  Im just asking that ALL posters try to do some self reflection 
and keep the threads focused so _we_ can make forward progress.  Let the 
other groups flounder if they wish...

I suspect that part of the reason we only have a handful of active posters 
is that many folks are overwhelmed by the volume in spurts (near IETFs) 
and by the digressions ("This thread stared to cover Alarms and digressed 
into an OS discussion before just stopping..."). 

> >   In order to both reengage folks (besides myself even) and to make
> > some more visible and constructive progress on CAP, Id like to suggest
> > that we A) ... B) try to resolve 1 issue before turning our focus onto
> > others.
> 
> The problem is that it is taking over a week per issue and
> there were over 30 issues. We needed to speed it up.

Part of the root of this problem is our tendency to digress instead of 
staying on topic.  Im just as guilty of this as several others here are so 
Ill take some of the heat for that (but not for the recent flood). 

I know we all enjoy a good and lively discussion (anyone who doubts this 
should watch the IETF hallway talks) but speed going nowhere on many 
topics does not improve our chances of getting done faster.

Should we ask the WGs Co-chairs to be ref's in keeping us focused in 
threads?  Is there another way to achieve this so we do make forward 
progress?  I think the starting point should be first the poster 
themselves followed by the 'creator' of the thread followed by the WG and 
the co-chairs but thats just my own feelings on it.

> We have eliminated many of the issues - most of the work needed
> was to integrate the debates into text. 

Concensus is goodness (although Ive yet to see much of that in postings)! 
We may not make a WG Last Call this time around but resolving issues is 
good progress.  If it would help, Ill buy some Cokes for the editors to 
give them some extra caffine at the next IETF...

> Some of the things that were in CAP were NOT compatible
> with BEEP. 

This is bad and MUST be avoided.  Im glad you have the time to notice this 
before it continues further.  When I catch up to the backlog Ill try to 
make sure it does not happen anywhere in CAP.  In the mean time its good 
that it is caught now and not after we've done lots more work that may 
become cruft.

Compatability issues MUST be preserved and to do any other work on stuff 
that breaks it is just a waste of time and an excercise in idiocy.  A 
builder does not put in the flooring and wall board if the house 
foundation and framing needs to be redone... (At least the good ones 
dont!)

Now lets refocus our threads/efforts on the issues they were meant to be 
on and resolve all the issues that we can before the next meeting...

Bruce