[e-mail] is a failure (was: Weekly posting summary for [e-mail])

[SM <[e-mail]>]

At 15:58 07-06-2013, John C Klensin wrote:
>And it is getting to that conclusion from the above that often
>troubles me about the posting summary list rankings.  Assuming a
>significant issues shows up on the list, whether in conjunction
>with a Last Call or something else.  Posting a comment and then
>following up the comments of others with a couple of more
>postings constitutes three messages in a week, which is pretty
>reasonable.  On the other hand, if there are four such issues in
>a single week (it happens) then that same individual gets
>"credited" with a dozen messages, which would make the top of
>the list in many weeks.

I'll reuse some text from IETF 55:

  - Decisions are taken by backroom deals, intimidation and
    mob psychology

  - People unsubscribe in disgust in droves

Many years ago the following criticism was made against another body:

   "The process is stacked in favour of multinationals with expense accounts
    who can afford to talk on the phone for two hours a week and jet to world
    capitals for meetings."

The IESG once said that it prefers that comments on Last Calls be 
sent to the [e-mail] list.  The IESG also said that authors, 
working group Chairs and the responsible Area Director are presumed 
to see all such messages.

Is posting the summary list ranking a form of intimidation?  I don't 
know.  If [e-mail] is a failure as significant issues are not 
showing up on the list (see quoted text above) or if the IESG prefers 
that comments on Last Calls be sent to some other list it can say 
that.  If people unsubscribing in droves is a problem, the IESG could 
recommend having two hour phone calls a week and meetings in world 
capitals for Last Calls.  If the IESG believes that it is more 
practical to take decisions through backroom deals it can use a 
non-public list for handling Last Calls.

If a significant number of people cannot act or conduct themselves in 
a proper way, especially toward others, it is a social problem.  If 
people cannot filter the [e-mail] mailing list, it is a 
technical problem.  The IETF has published a specification which 
describes a language for filtering email messages at time of final 
delivery.  After reading the latest messages to the list I might conclude that:

  (i)   people do not know about the mail filtering language

  (ii)  people are having technical difficulties using email

  (iii) it might rain tomorrow

As an off-topic comment, there are are alternative ways in making a 
decision; the best judgement of the most experienced or IETF Consensus.

Regards,
-sm