Received: from localhost ([::1]:49378 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1auy0K-00022w-TS; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 01:05:56 -0700 Received: from mail-lf0-f41.google.com ([209.85.215.41]:35975) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1auy0D-00022n-Ew for llg-members@lojban.org; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 01:05:54 -0700 Received: by mail-lf0-f41.google.com with SMTP id u64so7197098lff.3 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 01:05:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=xh/3Cp2nmCWshyV4uI50REDeVY3+vHvwaeVxdhykYyI=; b=yDEb946ajVPCROntX1b+DoMxnQmm1IXkWSA4qaI3xq8NYH0GELTJYgpJubiQt3W0ZV S8wRHQ5Tn/6QB4FpXXuxzAtcFZFat/8bK6YBUWVkG9CXqKjMPh6RqHLOgU4aPUnb1MOC 5Yt3OHDuQGTvo0W+KDln/isg7FPd8WB4GMQIlbznVBd5ZDfsx3R25BW82FBFAtG/urRx qAFyVFWCwm3jbBfhO+i/MSdaxNZ8tKgDrJ1H5Z3L0ES7kRarBuhAMbDbcBzg5fJsi6GS QvfIZ0eERcbL28wgfYdWWKPBMuX0+MDdzebTLRT755PuxqE8saBKdnkVUIJfG+WGLbky Rohw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=xh/3Cp2nmCWshyV4uI50REDeVY3+vHvwaeVxdhykYyI=; b=J8SKgligvq0F4AhaV1doLYFtfXWyYIejGVqgVc0ZEOse49CeJ/+xZi5K88B1lBKWmm KEsa21sM4O+qhPgKtixXN7qY9pTWXps4N+FZnCLE2yhEHjG1Ify7DGSCZP+VUrYQWXwt UyDOzEahqHTabrVyAYcY7nRkbNyL5788ZnAvg3l+mDFc+mwrLNC7NGtuPjDaYtQtg28m hBu+uGburug3WPQhWu8blNtEyGzldS9AhhVw/k5Wd94aw3tI06nXlBjxxKkS0AJ5FE4X Uhg/NlyOB+BscZxiXgvhShROy/ibH5Y4TH1lKddtQlAfA0nUIs32hKHiyEo524X2u73p YrQw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FW7Gn3hCa3we6xD78PxS1XrR3EQ3RY4d38fArLyja3vrUi45wJnhDtb3JZCSjewJ+qBugN6rrAfd+u0Vg== X-Received: by 10.112.124.228 with SMTP id ml4mr568157lbb.113.1461657942541; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 01:05:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.144.229 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 01:05:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <14B83AD6-319C-4DBF-A28C-6A172D84BE52@gmail.com> From: Gleki Arxokuna Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:05:02 +0300 Message-ID: To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--) X-Spam_score: -2.0 X-Spam_score_int: -19 X-Spam_bar: -- Subject: Re: [Llg-members] IRC vs Email Meetings X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: llg-members@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6131711402357985494==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============6131711402357985494== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bfd037472cb2a05315ec21a --047d7bfd037472cb2a05315ec21a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2016-04-26 11:01 GMT+03:00 And Rosta : > The chair can shepherd the meeting along, setting deadlines, and so forth= , > but as I said, it's an onerous job. If the chair can execute that taxing > job well, then the meeting runs well. But it's a really big ask of the > chair. > > However, as a way to ease the burden, what about having, by email, a > longer period of informal discussion, followed by, still by email, the > formal meeting operating to a strictish schedule, where there is understo= od > to be a social obligation on LLG members not to move out of the blue or > discuss at the formal meeting anything that could have been discussed at > the informal stage, so at the formal meeting one would only discuss, say, > the ramifications of votes whose outcomes were not reasonably predictable > in advance of the meeting? To make things even simpler, schedule the form= al > meetings a year in advance, and just leave it to members to make sure > they've done all necessary discussion in time for the meeting. > I complain only that people are silent for some period and then suddenly maybe "recall" a meeting is going on and start commenting. Adding a real time discussion can make the meeting going faster. Logs of IRC meetings can help everyone to understand what was discussed, what was missed. For 90% of the members there will be nothing more to say, only to vote what was already agreed upon in an IRC meeting. > > --And. > > On 26 April 2016 at 08:36, Riley Martinez-Lynch > wrote: > >> I don=E2=80=99t think it is fair to fault the chair of the meeting for w= hat is >> cumbersome about the format. A meeting that lasts for months is difficul= t >> to plan around. It can heat up unexpectedly, with votes called suddenly,= or >> lose people=E2=80=99s attention over time. Vacations, illness, seasonal = work >> demands: The longer the meeting goes, the greater the chances of >> conflicting commitments. That seems to me a function of time, independen= t >> of the style of the chair. >> >> Long email threads are also difficult to follow. Several times throughou= t >> this meeting I have gone digging through months of messages to answer >> questions such as, was this report given, was this motion seconded, did >> this motion pass, etc. >> >> I think it=E2=80=99s good that the matters that we discuss are discussed= at >> length. But I continue to question whether it is optimal to do it all in >> the on-the-record and actionable context of the member=E2=80=99s meeting= . I accept >> that this is a minority opinion. >> >> =E2=80=94Riley no=E2=80=99u la mukti >> _______________________________________________ >> Llg-members mailing list >> Llg-members@lojban.org >> http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > > --047d7bfd037472cb2a05315ec21a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


2016-04-26 11:01 GMT+03:00 And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com>:
The chair can shep= herd the meeting along, setting deadlines, and so forth, but as I said, it&= #39;s an onerous job. If the chair can execute that taxing job well, then t= he meeting runs well. But it's a really big ask of the chair.

<= /div>
However, as a way to ease the burden, what about having, by email= , a longer period of informal discussion, followed by, still by email, the = formal meeting operating to a strictish schedule, where there is understood= to be a social obligation on LLG members not to move out of the blue or di= scuss at the formal meeting anything that could have been discussed at the = informal stage, so at the formal meeting one would only discuss, say, the r= amifications of votes whose outcomes were not reasonably predictable in adv= ance of the meeting? To make things even simpler, schedule the formal meeti= ngs a year in advance, and just leave it to members to make sure they'v= e done all necessary discussion in time for the meeting.

I complain only that people are silent for some p= eriod and then suddenly maybe "recall" a meeting is going on and = start commenting.

Adding a real time discussion ca= n make the meeting going faster. Logs of IRC meetings can help everyone to = understand what was discussed, what was missed. For 90% of the members ther= e will be nothing more to say, only to vote what was already agreed upon in= an IRC meeting.

=C2=A0
<= div>
--And.

O= n 26 April 2016 at 08:36, Riley Martinez-Lynch <shunpiker@gmail.com&= gt; wrote:
I don=E2=80=99t think i= t is fair to fault the chair of the meeting for what is cumbersome about th= e format. A meeting that lasts for months is difficult to plan around. It c= an heat up unexpectedly, with votes called suddenly, or lose people=E2=80= =99s attention over time. Vacations, illness, seasonal work demands: The lo= nger the meeting goes, the greater the chances of conflicting commitments. = That seems to me a function of time, independent of the style of the chair.=

Long email threads are also difficult to follow. Several times throughout t= his meeting I have gone digging through months of messages to answer questi= ons such as, was this report given, was this motion seconded, did this moti= on pass, etc.

I think it=E2=80=99s good that the matters that we discuss are discussed at= length. But I continue to question whether it is optimal to do it all in t= he on-the-record and actionable context of the member=E2=80=99s meeting. I = accept that this is a minority opinion.

=E2=80=94Riley no=E2=80=99u la mukti
_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@loj= ban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-membe= rs


_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@lojban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-membe= rs


--047d7bfd037472cb2a05315ec21a-- --===============6131711402357985494== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members --===============6131711402357985494==--