Re: "Tiny" working groups

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 29 Jul 2025, at 12:10, Michael StJohns wrote:

I think what I'm after is formalization of a model that seems to happen only by accident and isn't one of the specific options to Dispatch et al, and currently can easily mutate (through recharter) into the WG that never dies.
[...]
As for set up, we build a template.

I think, as others have indicated, that the instances that have occurred in the past have been quite a bit more intentional than "by accident" would imply. I know from my own experience that the quick spin-up/spin-down groups in the APP/ART area worked rather well by good design by the ADs. I think a model/template could be pretty easily put together; it would be worthwhile to chat with the ADs who have done this and get it set up.

I would rephrase your comment slightly:  "The key is a very time and work limited charter  that can't be rechartered, and a ruthless chair/facilitator who is willing to kill the group if there's any hint of slowing."

I think it's OK if this is widely understood as implicit in, e.g., DISPATCHing to a "Quick-Spin WG" (QSWG), to put a four-letter acronym to an unoriginal concept.

*sigh* I don't know if its doable, but it feels like we need some better ways to deal with the outliers we've gotten.

I think it's already been done, save the template.

pr
--
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux