Re: [Gendispatch] Updating the IETF Discussion List Charter (was: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-eggert-bcp45bis-02.txt)

[Rob Sayre <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, Jun 25, 2022 at 6:04 AM Eliot Lear <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
> On 25.06.22 02:30, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> > But, the above isn't that important, I think what's below is
> > moreso:
> >
> > On 24/06/2022 05:29, Keith Moore wrote:
> >> IMO it's long past time to stop trying to kill IETF's sense of
> >> community and high time to start trying to restore one.
> >
> > I very strongly agree with the above.
>
> Me too.
>

Adding an "off-topic", "discussion", or "random" communication channel is a
very common thing to do in online communities. The list with the most
general charter does not have to have the widest latitude.

Arguments like "stop trying to kill the IETF's sense of community" aren't
called for. Just way over the top, to be honest.

If what you mean in by dissecting and reconstructing is the splitting of
> lists and removal of plenary power from the IETF list, then I agree that
> we have fragmented that function in a way that has harmed the
> organization's community identity and, I believe, the Internet
> architecture.


What is the evidence for this harm?

Plenary is needed not only for that identity but so that
> the left hand (or however many hands we have) knows what the right hand
> is doing.
>
> But that doesn't mean that there should be  a free-for-all on a mailing
> list.  Endless bickering about the same old subjects is not helpful.
> Debating points not within the power of the IETF is counter-productive.
>

Well, when I wrote that IETF@ was "outward-facing", what I meant was that
newcomers encounter it and it does happen to represent the organization by
dint of its name.

As a list for experienced IETF participants, I think it functions very
well. It sounds important, although it is not, and that attracts the
attention of some personality types.

For newcomers (think: "maybe I should read this list to figure out what the
IETF is up to") or outsiders, it is misleading.

thanks,
Rob