Re: A concept resurrected(?) - WG secretary?

[George Michaelson <ggm@apnic.net>]

[newbie co-chair comments alert.. -ggm]

At the just past APNIC member meeting in Seoul, and at the up-coming
APRICOT/APNIC combined meeting, we have been hiring closed caption people who
normally do either TV subtitles, or courtroom recording, to do a screen and
jabber/weblog displayed verbatim log.

We found it useful, but the people charged with writing up canonical minutes did
say the divergences were a problem, and that 'scary' errors of meaning could
creep in.

I think the value in screening logs of things like this is about participation,
not record keeping. Having said which, I too have been doing jabber logging in
several WG I attend, and while its nice that the WG chairs have been
appreciative I don't over-estimate their value to them in compiling the real
minutes. They are different things, and the jabber log at best is an input, not
of itself a canonical record.

Something to keep in mind is the ITU/CCITT concept of the 'rapporteur' who is
charged with summarizing the state of consensus. We've also played with that at
APNIC meetings, and its helped defuse things where the chairs are seen as being
too close to the subject to give neutral/dispassionate views, often having
document in process as well as chairing the meeting.

cheers
	-George