IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Interim step on meetings site feedback for sites currently under active consideration

Vinayak Hegde <vinayakh@gmail.com> Tue, 19 April 2016 18:56 UTC

Return-Path: <vinayakh@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B28E912E48D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:56:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oF4pZ8jNPyEv for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22f.google.com (mail-wm0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E02BC12E48B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:56:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id u206so45387540wme.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:56:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=6gthE+LhrO//QSmvJkmW0RkVDE6m45DirPtlpLas35s=; b=gOE87Y7JBuQHvCi7WQlUjYUYSrGfGsOwCeXXSj4HyxAe7CHJg9mDOfZeoroyviqOBP WLpH78p7HVx21YCp9Dw4MMbPuOvcnFgkMZz6ukdsxm8QazszmOVtawM1xBz/fE8cR/t6 fCMcrccaGskkwixvX6MoRm2f+cutjqi0BYc7ta3DLq3GP6wb5WhhuNh04mAoi7AxlDkM gmK5cI9tVtuzNdB/p+v70fT7fyCEQjAeQfCu/U68eAZPgIvlR/61hW6W/gueVMnS/2nh Fb4zeTP7BwRTG1tcg5zlresd/9wZB1eBVzu3/igSGl51GPrEAVnPOiEjmv02591a1yJX 79uA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=6gthE+LhrO//QSmvJkmW0RkVDE6m45DirPtlpLas35s=; b=RTq5Pjf7DQhQf3bmegSPnbCQ2Al4aoqXV6NsM4OoLqsCf3WgmhWOJruXLm3VFl4S2B A2B9EzwnsPTRCqScgXN7uEtiDFa4dxVLzr23nj5u+huTrAZL0cRdODnPvdd85IiPt9YV ekvI9I75Y88jlB9ZokvKWAJulqSkU5BVYWbYl82+vhAAajEm6zkxszI4Ra4XA0tJrUp+ QG8LDVP/crWw1ubWo6lV4Kd4EmrS7Co9zot6T8jl0t8dNVI9KA2eQK6SWBb2xPiTi5KR 7G9ZpCrZ9FeKaGB7TdUZD4wiTFnQP/e/lVOQfOMwd0ScyfSxZ1GOB0Naj8qP2cv9NrRT hp1w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXUaH0nqumz+MhJM9evXD4CAW8ED7kfAaRkArwaw6OOcvEF9I5SQvckw/CV3BESm0uwQDKzwv48qFWzKQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.28.107.13 with SMTP id g13mr5462095wmc.62.1461092215463; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:56:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.133.99 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:56:55 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAPt1N1n+676sAWFLee3oUGUgnTNHh95yFgrsmyjB5VbSmF-=XQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20160418161552.9368.65562.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <8fb376e11631f9ddf73f9385ec5472c3.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <57151C55.30206@gmail.com> <54D9A539-6409-4692-85F6-E4837E823AAE@gmail.com> <CAPt1N1n+676sAWFLee3oUGUgnTNHh95yFgrsmyjB5VbSmF-=XQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 00:26:55 +0530
Message-ID: <CAKe6YvPGufULDN=SLbR8YZ-7-tUj-H18U4h4JTH7_S3UJKvRbw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Interim step on meetings site feedback for sites currently under active consideration
From: Vinayak Hegde <vinayakh@gmail.com>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/3FeN_rcyqO6udfyC2t1YuavD1oQ>
Cc: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 18:56:58 -0000

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 11:25 PM, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> wrote:
> It should be pretty easy for the IAD to measure this by comparing the list
> of newcomers in Argentina to the list of participants in Berlin, for
> example.   I am fairly sure that they already do this, and possibly may even
> have made presentations about it from time to time at the plenary... :)

Hi Ted,

I am not picking on you but this idea is flawed at many levels.
Fundamentally we need to answer
1. What does a (meaningful ?) contribution mean ?
2. How does that relate to active participation ? Are there thresholds
or is it a continuum ? Does I mean writing a draft or is reviewing
drafts, taking minutes and hacking on code to check real world
implementation good enough.

The answers are more nuanced and varied than one might guess at first
glance. At IETF 95 in BA several long-time contributors participated
remotely. I am sure that they would take offense to this idea if they
have contributed remotely and on the mailing lists.

Just to emphasize, several WG chairs also do not attend every meeting.
Are they active ? I think there needs to be less emphasis on physical
meetings overall (FWIW I think we are already moving in that direction
quite rapidly. But at the same time F2F interaction cannot be done
away with completely IMHO and is also not going away.)

-- Vinayak

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email