San Diego

[April Marine]

So, what do y'all think about meeting in San Diego?

At the last IETF, I asked for some feedback from USWG re whether they
thought WEIRD should declare its experiment done and close down, or keep
going. The consensus was that many thought WEIRD should keep going. Of
course, WEIRD didn't meet last time, so it's not like actually asking the
WG itself, so I thought I would ask you yourself.

One thing that Chris and I have talked about is getting a co-chair. Is it
worth conning, uh, drafting someone to assist our WEIRD leader (couldn't
resist that one :-), or do you all feel the WG is a loss?

Should we schedule a mtg in San Diego to regroup?

Should we put "WEIRD status" on the USWG agenda?

Anything we should consider that I haven't?

Feedback welcome and requested!

thanks,
April

[Robert G. Ferrell]

Post by April Marine
At the last IETF, I asked for some feedback from USWG re whether they
thought WEIRD should declare its experiment done and close down, or keep
going. The consensus was that many thought WEIRD should keep going. Of
course, WEIRD didn't meet last time, so it's not like actually asking the
WG itself, so I thought I would ask you yourself.

I may have missed something back at the beginning, but isn't WEIRD
supposed to be an ongoing effort, rather than a goal-oriented task
like protocol development? I mean, we can't just up and declare
one day that the public are sufficiently elucidated, wash our hands and
head home, can we?

Post by April Marine
One thing that Chris and I have talked about is getting a co-chair. Is it
worth conning, uh, drafting someone to assist our WEIRD leader (couldn't
resist that one :-), or do you all feel the WG is a loss?

I should think that the number of responses you get to this
query will be a fairly accurate reflection of whether or not the
group is defunct.

I've forwarded a few "WEIRD Questions" from my Web site to the
group and gotten zero response. Not even crickets. From that
experience I would have to say that, as a working group, there isn't
much to go on here. But maybe it was just bad timing.

Cheers,

RGF

Robert G. Ferrell, CISSP
Information Systems Security Officer
National Business Center
U. S. Dept. of the Interior
***@nbc.gov
========================================
Who goeth without humor goeth unarmed.
========================================

[Bruggeman, John]

Based on this email list I was assuming the list was somewhat dead as well.
I haven't heard much here - I thought maybe I was missing something (like
some other active list).

Perhaps not - is this this only WEIRD mailing list?

John

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert G. Ferrell [mailto:***@rgfsparc.cr.usgs.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 2:58 PM
To: ietf-***@imc.org
Subject: Re: San Diego

Post by April Marine
At the last IETF, I asked for some feedback from USWG re whether they
thought WEIRD should declare its experiment done and close down, or keep
going. The consensus was that many thought WEIRD should keep going. Of
course, WEIRD didn't meet last time, so it's not like actually asking the
WG itself, so I thought I would ask you yourself.

I may have missed something back at the beginning, but isn't WEIRD
supposed to be an ongoing effort, rather than a goal-oriented task
like protocol development? I mean, we can't just up and declare
one day that the public are sufficiently elucidated, wash our hands and
head home, can we?

Post by April Marine
One thing that Chris and I have talked about is getting a co-chair. Is it
worth conning, uh, drafting someone to assist our WEIRD leader (couldn't
resist that one :-), or do you all feel the WG is a loss?

I should think that the number of responses you get to this
query will be a fairly accurate reflection of whether or not the
group is defunct.

I've forwarded a few "WEIRD Questions" from my Web site to the
group and gotten zero response. Not even crickets. From that
experience I would have to say that, as a working group, there isn't
much to go on here. But maybe it was just bad timing.

Cheers,

RGF

Robert G. Ferrell, CISSP
Information Systems Security Officer
National Business Center
U. S. Dept. of the Interior
***@nbc.gov
========================================
Who goeth without humor goeth unarmed.
========================================

[Austin Bill-P23393]

What has the group accomplished? Have we measured the results of those
accomplishments?

How many visitors per day come to the WEIRD Web site?

Is that number increasing or decreasing?

What kind of questions and how many questions are asked by visitors at the
web site?

Is our mailing list for our visitors growing or shrinking in size and how
active is the message traffic on that list?

How long do visitors to the web site stay and look around?

How often do they return?

Do they refer other people to the site?

How many other web sites link to this one?

How well are we placed in search engines for our "targeted" key word and
phrases?

...

And so forth.

...

Lots of questions. Not many answers.

How serious do we want to get about this?


Bill Austin
http://www.motorola.com/aspira/
http://bluetooth.listbot.com/
http://www.egroups.com/group/wirelesslan/



-----Original Message-----
From: Bruggeman, John [mailto:***@cn.huc.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 2:09 PM
To: ietf-***@imc.org
Subject: RE: San Diego


Based on this email list I was assuming the list was somewhat dead as well.
I haven't heard much here - I thought maybe I was missing something (like
some other active list).

Perhaps not - is this this only WEIRD mailing list?

John

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert G. Ferrell [mailto:***@rgfsparc.cr.usgs.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 2:58 PM
To: ietf-***@imc.org
Subject: Re: San Diego

Post by April Marine
At the last IETF, I asked for some feedback from USWG re whether they
thought WEIRD should declare its experiment done and close down, or keep
going. The consensus was that many thought WEIRD should keep going. Of
course, WEIRD didn't meet last time, so it's not like actually asking the
WG itself, so I thought I would ask you yourself.

I may have missed something back at the beginning, but isn't WEIRD
supposed to be an ongoing effort, rather than a goal-oriented task
like protocol development? I mean, we can't just up and declare
one day that the public are sufficiently elucidated, wash our hands and
head home, can we?

Post by April Marine
One thing that Chris and I have talked about is getting a co-chair. Is it
worth conning, uh, drafting someone to assist our WEIRD leader (couldn't
resist that one :-), or do you all feel the WG is a loss?

I should think that the number of responses you get to this
query will be a fairly accurate reflection of whether or not the
group is defunct.

I've forwarded a few "WEIRD Questions" from my Web site to the
group and gotten zero response. Not even crickets. From that
experience I would have to say that, as a working group, there isn't
much to go on here. But maybe it was just bad timing.

Cheers,

RGF

Robert G. Ferrell, CISSP
Information Systems Security Officer
National Business Center
U. S. Dept. of the Interior
***@nbc.gov
========================================
Who goeth without humor goeth unarmed.
========================================

[Burke Chris-CCB007]

Co-Chair might work well here. I've been swamped with work and personal issues for a while now and we've made very little progress, for which I apologize to the WG. I still think the work is worthwhile, and would appreciate the help. Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: April Marine [mailto:***@nominum.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 11:50 AM
To: WEIRD WG
Subject: San Diego


So, what do y'all think about meeting in San Diego?

At the last IETF, I asked for some feedback from USWG re whether they
thought WEIRD should declare its experiment done and close down, or keep
going. The consensus was that many thought WEIRD should keep going. Of
course, WEIRD didn't meet last time, so it's not like actually asking the
WG itself, so I thought I would ask you yourself.

One thing that Chris and I have talked about is getting a co-chair. Is it
worth conning, uh, drafting someone to assist our WEIRD leader (couldn't
resist that one :-), or do you all feel the WG is a loss?

Should we schedule a mtg in San Diego to regroup?

Should we put "WEIRD status" on the USWG agenda?

Anything we should consider that I haven't?

Feedback welcome and requested!

thanks,
April