[wg-d] Overview

["Bret A. Fausett" <baf@fausett.com>]

To Working Group D:

Shortly, I will forward to the list, in a separate message, a first, rough
draft of a report for Working Group D.

Theresa and I thought it important to move the work forward and felt that
the best way was to craft a skeletal version of a Working Group's policies
and procedures based on our discussions to date. Theresa and I have been
through what will follow, and we think it is a fair starting point for
further discussion.

While we have tried to be true to the discussions we have had on how
motions are made, who can vote, how will we vote/determine consensus,
etc., some of the more minor things in this draft have never been
discussed previously. Let's use this as an opportunity to discuss them.

Methodology.  Before you get into the draft, let me give you an overview
of how it came to be. I started by reviewing the archives of our
discussions to see where we had made progress. The archives are at
http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-d/Archives/index.html

I then used Kent Crispin's "hack" of RFC 2418, on the IETF's policies and
procedures, in order to get a structure for the document. I also borrowed
some of the membership and WG formation sections from Kent's hack, which
seemed in line with the group's thinking on those issues.
http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-d/Archives/msg00041.html

I then added the specifics of motions from some of our discussions on
Robert's Rules (which seemed preferable for motions, discussions and
voting to a large number of participants). Specifically, I incorporated
sections of the proposal from Mark Langston and the discussion from Karl
Auerbach, though I tried to formalize the "motions" a bit.
http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-d/Archives/msg00223.html
http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-d/Archives/msg00111.html
http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-d/Archives/msg00244.html

For the substance of what Working Group reports should look like, I used
the list suggested by David Johnson.
http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-d/Archives/msg00158.html

For the background on the purpose and scope of the rules, I used the
thread on "WG Principles," which begins at the URL below. (Use the
threaded discussion formatting in the archives to follow the entire
discussion.)
http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-d/Archives/msg00006.html

All of the messages were used to some degree, but the ones noted above are
places where I specifically did some cutting and pasting.

       * * * * *

While this should start the ball rolling, I propose that the next set of
revisions to this draft be made by a small drafting group that does not
include me. (This should ensure that there is no "runaway chair.") Please
let me know if you'd be interested in serving on such a drafting
committee.

I assume that our final work product will look different after the
discussions that follow. In fact, we should feel free to scrap this draft
in its entirety if it is not workable or helpful in our discussions. After
you've been through this, let's also think about what would be a
reasonable timeline to get this draft completed.

As a co-chair, I would entertain a motion that we discuss the draft that
will follow. I'll look for a motion and a second.

      -- Bret