Whoever's downvoting this, TuringTest is explaining a point of view and a different value system. If you don't relate to or like that value system, (me too!) no problem, but downvoting a helpful/informative comment drives down discussion and points of view other than your own.
I downvoted it because it addresses (at length) the issue of informal family gatherings in which TT's opponents already accept (for reasons specific to the scenario) that you're not supposed to show up at a specific time. It avoids the core issue of work scenarios where it's important that everyone be present.
IOW, non-responsive, and almost deliberately so.
Just because you have a long, coherent explanation doesn't mean it adds to the discussion.
The point being made was that informality needs not be specific to the family gathering scenario, and that it's not a core issue of work scenarios at multi-active cultures; I used an example you could relate to illustrate how it could it also be seen at work contexts in some circumstances. So I suppose you downvoted because you didn't get the point.
No, I got the point just fine: at best, there's no reason to apply the "show up whenever" ethos to meetings, because the best reasons for having it don't apply, as revealed by your attempt to come up with a reason. (Unless people are being called to the meeting despite being irrelevant, which is a separate issue.)
