At times, I've had difficulty contacting the assigned reviewers for my stage 2 proposals. Not everyone is responsive on GitHub, and I do not always have additional contact information. What can we do about this? I know that Ecma records email addresses of delegates on the meeting sign-in sheets. Making that information available to proposal authors would be a start. Any other suggestions? I don't want the hard work I've put into preparing my proposal for stage advancement well in advance of a meeting to be wasted because I couldn't contact stage 2 reviewers.
Agree that this is a general problem. Having better async communication is crucial to keeping momentum and avoiding the "gotta wait another 2 months" failure mode. Having emails is a start. What I really want is a more official, or at least a codified norm, of async communication in between plenary. This difficulty is 90% of the motivation behind standard library task group I'm planning to propose in December.
Ping @aki. Can you discuss this topic in the next chair group meeting? It'd be nice if we had guidance from the chair group on a strategy we can use to make this part of our process less painful. It'd be especially nice if that guidance came before the next time we assign stage 2 reviewers.