Re: [wg-review] Comments on WG procedures

["YJ Park (MINC)" <yjpark@minc.org>]

Kent,

Thank you for your contribution papers and a well-described note on
what could have been with "what if."

> Consider an alternate scenario, one where YJ started the WG with a clear
> statement of the real schedule, an explanation for why it is so
> compressed (the need to get things out in time for the required public
> comment periods before Melbourne), and had channeled the WG from the
> beginning towards the purpose of people submitting their own best
> comments.  Do you think that people would have left?

I have two comments to share with you and Review WG regarding "what if".

"What if NC forms Review WG as fast as possible say in August when NC
heard strong demand from GA in Yokoham instead of sometime bewteen
hustle-bustle holidays."

"What if NC allow Review WG substantial working days from its initial
begining
instead of this kind of energy-consuming tug-of-war between NC and WG."

As chair of review WG, I feel very responsible for what you have seen here
and hope Review WG in general can learn from what we have gone through.

Thanks,
YJ

--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html