Re: [Diversity] Participation in active IETF work (was: Interim step on meetings site feedback for sites currently under active consideration)

Hi Nalini

Thanks alot. I had a great mentor (mentoring remotely) in 2013. I had
started in IETF discussions remotely from about 4 or 5 years (before the
mentoring program) it was a disaster but I kept good discussions. The
problem I faced was that I needed a mentor that is a participant in the WG
I am working in and I found that the best practical solution is having
mentors per WG not per region. However, I am happy we have mentors per
region which is good and I will work that we have mentors per WG as well. I
hope the IETF general area looks into this issue as well.

Best Regards,

AB

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 5:06 PM, <nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> >Thanks for your email. My opinion is that the IETF needs to work harder
> on these issues. IMHO, the problem is mainly that mentors are still in few
> numbers, and the IETF needs to look >into the IETF culture or better to say
> their WG culture. I recommend we need one or two mentors for each WG, so
> the mentor MUST not be the Chair or AD, the mentor MUST be a >participant
> in that WG (better if he/she was a Chair before).
>
> Abdussalam, thanks for your comments.  As head of the IETF Mentoring Team,
> we actually have quite a few mentors.   In fact, far more mentors than
> mentees.  Also, if we need mentors from a particular Working Group, I ask
> the WG and people are very generous with their time.   (For which, I thank
> everyone!)
>
> Are you speaking of remote mentors or regional mentors?
>
> What would you like the mentoring program to do?   We welcome suggestions!
>
>
> Nalini
> IETF Mentoring Team
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:58 AM, SM <sm@resistor.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Nalini,
> At 12:50 18-04-2016, nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com wrote:
>
> I wonder if there has not been more participation in active IETF work
> before from other regions because there was no structured way to start
> participating and language insensitivity.  (BTW, there is a new member of
> the Mentoring Team from Latin America, that I met in Buenos Aires who will
> translate the Mentoring emails into Spanish.)
>
>
> Attendance figures were used as a substitute for Participation figures.
> The IETF Community did not show much interest in doing anything about
> that.  A few years ago, an IAOC Chair posted the following to justify the
> meeting policy:
> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/pdfgakgOuij_5.pdf
>
> There wasn't any formal effort (as the one you are doing) to train people
> from other regions to start participating except for the meeting training
> sessions.  A person who is not used to discussing in English faces a higher
> learning curve in comparison with someone from Australia.
>
> The regional mentors (in the Cc) might be able to comment about why there
> has not been more active participation before.
>
> Regards,
> -sm
> _______________________________________________
> diversity mailing list
> diversity@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>
>
>
>
>