I don’t understand your reply.
Jurgen Appelo

Oh! Sorry if I was not clear. 
It looks to me as if you were proposing a different procedure, by invalidating some Scrum recommendations. While in some particular cases (like yours) this is something I can agree with, I disagree with the underlying idea that the practices are the important point and that ones are better than others always. That’s it.
For example, we do not need to invalidate one of the questions by saying “For someone in India, the question ‘What will you do today’ is quite useless at 6:30 pm.” because by rephrasing it to ‘What will you do until our next DSM’ the issue is gone. Keep the purpose, make the rest optional. 
I work in Switzerland and Germany and I can tell you how much harm the emphasis on blindly copying practices can produce.
So … we both agree on the purpose. The practices (I believe) cannot be compared independently of the context where they are being applied. Practices are (for me) like a toolbox. Optional. Depending on the situation, we do this … or that. But the purpose (why?) is clear to everybody.

Hopefully I explained myself better now. Thanks for making me think!!

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.