Subject: Re: [PWE3] Inter-op is not necessary - Trying to pull some thread s together

From: Danny McPherson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 10:17:38 -0700

On Nov 22, 2005, at 10:11 AM, Gray, Eric wrote:
>
> 	Since you deferred the resolution of an issue over what
> was said during the meeting pending resolution of the issue
> via the mailing list, then the questions and answers that are
> in doubt should not be allowed to stand as is in the minutes.

I think that's a fair enough statement if we can't come to
agreement on what occurred at the meeting.  Let me discuss
with Matthew and Stewart....

>
> 	What exactly is the point of posting preliminary minutes
> if comments made IRT those preliminary minutes are not going
> to be addressed?

I agree.  But if there's disagreement then we simply need
to find a new way to clarify the situation, which we're now
doing, and indicating this as such in the minutes seems
quite appropriate.

-danny

_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3

---

From: "Gray, Eric" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 12:11:07 -0500

Danny,

	That's fine with me - however, one of the reasons for 
having someone take minutes is to allow for us to agree on
what was said and done during the meeting.  If we don't do
so, then the minutes MUST be presumed to have very little
value.

	Since we do not actually follow anything approximating
Robert's Rules, we do not have the step where we approve the
minutes from the prior meeting.  Consequently, the minutes
need to be "approved" prior to publishing - or there's no way
to recall them.

	In other words - if you want to defer resolving the issue, 
or worse, claim it is unnecessary to resolve it - then remove 
the current wording that is under dispute and insert wording 
that indicates that what actually occurred at that point is 
under dispute.

--
Eric

--> -----Original Message-----
--> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 
--> On Behalf Of Danny McPherson
--> Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 11:53 AM
--> To: pwe3
--> Subject: Re: [PWE3] Inter-op is not necessary - Trying to 
--> pull some thread s together
--> 
--> 
--> On Nov 22, 2005, at 7:49 AM, Gray, Eric wrote:
--> 
--> > Before the fabric of the discussion becomes too frayed, 
--> this is in 
--> > response to Danny's asking for WG input.  Danny may have 
--> left this 
--> > "question" lacking in structure, but - from context
--> > - it is essentially asking the question(s) that Vach, Andy, etc.
--> > subsequently responded to.
--> 
--> I actually avoided asking the question(s) YET per I was 
--> awaiting a chat with Stewart and Mark about this.  I'll 
--> start a new thread with a question set in just a bit.
--> 
--> -danny
--> 
--> _______________________________________________
--> pwe3 mailing list
--> [email-masked]
--> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3
-->