On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 08:17:20PM -0400, Adam Turoff wrote: > On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 02:17:55PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > mjd-list-bootstrap <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > > > I'm still expecting people to object to the idea of many many lists. > > > What happened to the people who were saynig yesterday that there should > > > only be a few lists? > > > > My main objection would be mostly dealt with if the chairs of these > > "mini-groups" committed to summarizing the discussion and the results of > > the discussion on the separate mailing lists (or delegating this task to > > someone else) and posting those summaries to some main list. > > I was thinking about this today as well, but about the bootstrap list > in particular. > > My presumption is that a wg chair has an agenda, and has a background > for the wg area. If the chair were to provide summaries in *all* cases, > it would lead to these problems: > 1) is keeping minutes an undue burdon on the wg chair? > 2) does the chair keeping minutes remove a check or balance on the process? > > If someone *else* on a workgroup were charged with maintaining the weekly > summaries, it would be one less thing a chair needed to deal with, and > one more way to involve a larger portion of the community. It would also > provide checks and balances on wg chairs. > > It's an idea. Not sure if I'm for or against it. I'd say the wg chair has the responsibility but can delegate it. Tim.