[cabfpub] Revised draft agenda for F2F in North Carolina

[Ryan Sleevi]

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:45 PM, Kirk Hall via Public <public at cabforum.org>
wrote:

> Here is a new effort at a draft Agenda at the F2F meeting in North
> Carolina.  This is not necessarily the order for topics or the day (Day 1
> or Day 2) – if you have suggestions on that, let me know.  Also, I made a
> rough guess of time needed, but have not added up the total for now –
> please let me know if you think more or less time is needed.
>
> I have listed Discussion Leaders for  most topics, but not all – please
> make suggestions.
>

Can you indicate who requested the item? Do we know how they ended up on
the agenda?

Given the challenges faced in making the best use of our time, I would
again reiterate the previous request that unless there is some actively
signed up to be a discussion leader, we table the topic. If there is a
topic of urgent importance, let a member raise it and drive the discussion.
The consequence is I am asking you to remove Items 12 and 13 unless someone
specifically steps up to facilitate discussion.


> I tried to list all topics that have been suggested – but I probably
> forgot some.  Please let me know if any are missing.
>

I made several suggestions in
https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/2017-February/009826.html , including
highlighting ones you'd missed in the previous agenda. For completeness,

- The role and relationship of the Forum (30 - 45 minutes)
- A retrospective of SHA-1 and the challenges presented (30 minutes?)
- Workflow management (parallel to governance during the Working Group days)

I also see you've allocated only an hour for discussion for our "Future
Thoughts". Given the nature of the Forum, and as previously suggested, I
would like to suggest we budget at least two hours, if not more. My
suggestion would be that we begin our morning with a discussion of Pending
Ballots and CAA, we have an hour discussion to refresh everyone on the
issues of the previous day, to explore challenges, and work together to
understand and prioritize. Knowing that these will likely engage some
spirited discussions, if someone then steps up for the aforementioned Items
12 and 13, we then take the opportunity to transition to them. We then
revisit the "Future Thoughts" discussion for another hour.

The purpose of this is to make the most use of everyones' time, by allowing
for what is known within standards circles as "The Hallway Track" - the
ability to use our breaks and lunches to get more time 1:1 or in small
groups, to discuss issues, and understand the issues, and then see if
there's opportunity to bring that broadly to discussion and consensus. Such
an approach is designed with the goal of ensuring ideas are explained,
they're socialized, solutions proposed (in the morning), problems are
identified, discussion is had, and then we can see if the new proposals
have a better chance of consensus.

In doing so, we can hopefully take discussion of a matter that might
otherwise take months or years, condense into two days of good faith,
spirited discussions, and walk away with a better understanding of each
others goals, the challenges that may exist, and to iterate on solutions in
a productive dialog.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20170301/d41563a0/attachment-0003.html>