Subject: RE: A concept resurrected(?) - WG secretary?

From: Eastlake III Donald-LDE008 <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 14:47:46 -0400

Fascinating. I don't see the words "punishment" or "subtract" anywhere in
my message nor any way to associate the points I suggested with anything
other than the working group...

There was a time when the Secretariate put gold stars on the WG chair
badges of WG chairs that had gotten their minutes in for the previous
meeting... as an alternative, that could be revived.

Anyway, I never claimed that all WG chairs would be happy with my idea
or that there might not even be someone who found it so offensive that
they would stop submitted minutes because of it. All I claim is that you
would get more minutes in earlier and I stick by that claim.

Donald

PS: While admittedly meetings of the TRADE WG are pretty short and mild,
when I have a problem where I don't get minutes from the volunteer
scribe(s), I usually make up minutes from memory, send them out on the
list, fix them up for any comments I get, and submit them to the
Secretariate.

-----Original Message-----
From: David Meyer [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, 09 October, 2003 11:18 AM
To: Eastlake III Donald-LDE008
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: A concept resurrected(?) - WG secretary?

>> There have been lots of good ideas posted about this. But I don't
>> think one formula works for all WGs/Chairs.
>> 
>> There is a saying that whatever is measured improves. If you want
>> minutes filed in a timely way, develop a point system with a couple
>> of steps where a WG gets the most points if they submit minutes within
>> ten days of a meeting down to zero if they miss the next proceedings
>> and post a list of WGs sorted by their average minutes score per
>> meeting. Admitted this does not measure the quality of the minutes
>> but I bet you would get more timely-filed minutes and, other things
>> being equal, the fresher and more current the meeting is when minutes
>> are written/corrected, the better they will be.

	I'm really not a fan of punishment, and further, after
	the Vienna IETF I experienced (for the first time)
	difficult getting minutes from my scribes (all three of
	them, actually). So no matter how much time I may have
	set aside to edit/complete minutes, without the raw
	material from the scribes, it really didn't matter. So in
	this case, what are you going to do, punish (subtract
	points) from the scribe, or from the WG chair for
	choosing a "bad" scribe? 

	Just doesn't seem workable to me. 

	Dave

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 16:54:44 -0700

>meeting... as an alternative, that could be revived.

I think at one point they did it by putting the gold stars on the badges
of the working group chairs from the area that had gotten *all* of
its meeting minutes in first.  For a while, that meant it was always
user services, since it was a small area (and Joyce was very good at
getting her folks to get minutes in).  If we do revive this form
of carrot, I'd suggest updating it to be the Scribes/Secretaries
themselves, when they get the minutes in on time, so that
there is some form of recognition for them.

Just a thought,
				Ted