RE: [wg-review] [TELECON] Disappointment.

[Elisabeth Porteneuve <Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr>]

Andy Gardner <andy@navigator.co.nz> wrote:
>
> And while we're at it, it's probably a good idea to drop the ICANN
> methodology of having a list of times at "selected" locations (as if the
> people at those locations are more important than others - or maybe people
> at those locations are dumber than the rest? :^) - but I digress - and just
> state the UTC time of the call, and in the case of an actual event, the UTC
> time and local time at the event.
>
> I'm pretty sure we're all capable of converting UTC to our local time, or
> clicking on http://www.worldtimezone.com/ ourselves.
>
> --
> Andrew P. Gardner
> barcelona.com stolen, stmoritz.com stays. What's uniform about the UDRP?
> We could ask ICANN to send WIPO a clue, but do they have any to spare?
> Get active: http://www.domain-owners.org http://www.tldlobby.com
> --

I am the one guilty for an idea of a list of times at "selected" locations,
which is a reminder to the Names Council Members, indicating them
*their local time*, and a help to the NC as a whole to look for
the best possible compromise for teleconferences.

The Names Council Members change over time, and the "selected"
locations as well. The list of locations is a nice invitaion
to look on the geography and international aspects.

As for the UTC -- even people working every day with UTC time
in mind, as on space program, do not use it for meeting time.
Have you ever try to make a telecon reservation giving to your
telco operator the UTC time ? Well, try ...

Kind regards,
Elisabeth Porteneuve
--
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