Re: [Diversity] early mentoring for /any/ draft (was - Re: [Mentoring-coordinators] Participation in active IETF work)

>I agree with you, but I will add that there are many people want to participate in IDs but there are problems with some of the WG culture, no secret. So The is a language of argument and >discussion that new people may not get use to, which is needed in such WG culture.

Abdussalam,

Yes, the IETF culture has its strengths and drawbacks.  In fact, you may want to take a look at:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-elkins-ietf-unwritten-rules-values/

This is a presentation that we have started doing for new people at IETF.  It seems to have been quite well received.  So far, I am talking to people from Japan, China, & Latin America to translate into their own languages.  

You may also wish to look at:

https://www.ietf.org/tao.html

I suspect that the discussion style of "very frank" feedback may be what you are referring to?  Am I correct?

If I might, the goal of discussions is to have the best engineering solution come out.  And, I know sometimes people get passionate in their arguments and give feedback maybe a bit more directly than is considered normal in a number of cultures.

In my opinion, passion is good.   We need to care and care a LOT about what we do.  That is what will make the work good.

Definitely, people need to be kinder and more sensitive in how they give their feedback.  Is this what you are talking about?

I wonder if we should have mentoring workshops on "How to Give and Receive Feedback".    Just trying to get from you what you are thinking.

Nalini

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:52 PM, <nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com> wrote:

>
>
>
>
>On 4/19/2016 9:35 AM, nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com wrote:
>>> think you are right on all counts.  I have seen some very horrible prose
>>> from native English speakers.
>>>
>>> But, the mentoring program is not just for non-native English speakers.
>>>   It is for all IETFers.
>
>>There is an appealingly subversive possibility in this:  Getting 
>>"outside" people to review work much earlier in its lifecycle.  We have 
>>long lamented the fact that we do reviews late in the cycle, after a 
>>great deal of energy has been expended and people have become 
>>entrenched.  Getting others to review the work early it its development 
>>could do considerably more than improve its writing...
>
>Indeed.
>
>
>The mentoring initiative I want to start after Berlin is for people to solicit a team to work with them to co-author a draft.  That is, person x has an idea (but no draft), he / she gets 5 minutes & 2 foils to present the idea in a webinar.   Others on the webinar ask questions for another 5-10 minutes.   Then, if people would like, they can tell person x that they would be interested in being a co-author.
>
>
>If person x gets no takers as far as co-authors, he / she may wish to draw the inevitable conclusion.
>
>
>Of course, if person x feels that they have not fairly represented themselves, they can have a second chance.  But, after the second time, and still no takers ....
>
>
>BTW, no third chances.
>
>
>Nalini
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>diversity mailing list
>diversity@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>
>

_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity