Re: Please welcome the facilitators at ietf@ietf.org

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Fri, 11 November 2016 01:19 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.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 3F99B1295C4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Nov 2016 17:19:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.744
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.744 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DATE_IN_PAST_06_12=1.543, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=opendkim.org header.b=wc7tmjB/; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com header.b=B7thmFSq
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 eAF0aRXcCdyp for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Nov 2016 17:19:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D71D1294BB for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Nov 2016 17:19:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.226.50.127]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id uAB1JQ3V001532 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 10 Nov 2016 17:19:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1478827177; x=1478913577; bh=/JtTjHwv4j6kNJg+jbgLmLyWEzX22Y2R2bth7Wldyz8=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=wc7tmjB/+nLVPIfMVO5a9lg4kPd0dC1PeHZDABLNLQufnsTzx1GzliCqZdmj+aUAh W+50z4H3pWTno2RqmEa7c7c3PZhRB77cTzyr8UTS1UkK6/73NtMTvurTcapE9IQaOB e75mGK6vSlIGTqN0oYKAWSGUwDqj6xrBbwLLrnT8=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1478827177; x=1478913577; i=@elandsys.com; bh=/JtTjHwv4j6kNJg+jbgLmLyWEzX22Y2R2bth7Wldyz8=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=B7thmFSqM/1MxngrJx1pAQdXq9xCkXne6CzelMFfcsF4HJl2V8bb/AbnrJOuLZmKN vFS3gLa5C7rrptbvdvQuU9yWLHeIzV+XF4heIqkRc9kI+C9YPpXhQddayzGhgQLh1K Q377xYEq71yT8k5EEdd+pqWHTFJS7y2NRARggkQw=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20161110063034.0b60fed0@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 09:04:10 -0800
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, ietf@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Subject: Re: Please welcome the facilitators at ietf@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <007F7CEB7E42D5ED7E79D16F@JcK-HP8200>
References: <29F4A6D4-AD5B-4409-9EDA-D8761DE243CE@ietf.org> <6.2.5.6.2.20161109103948.0b6fe0e0@resistor.net> <d331dca8-6ebb-5545-9f7f-7b9e272b49c4@gmail.com> <1E4B9FCC33CE88788FE4E5E3@JcK-HP8200> <6.2.5.6.2.20161109202513.0beed728@elandnews.com> <007F7CEB7E42D5ED7E79D16F@JcK-HP8200>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/3HFznRBQIjqdFKelhTFG_FqtmTg>
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: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 01:19:40 -0000

Hi John,
At 05:53 10-11-2016, John C Klensin wrote:
>That is consistent with the point I was trying to make.  Part of
>what I understood you to say was that the role, as currently
>defined, was taking up too much time as compared to value and
>your and Melinda to suggest that there weren't a lot of cases in
>which it was likely to be particularly effective.  I think there

As this is an experiment I provided some data so that Jari can draw a 
conclusion.  The time taken was more about providing information for 
the next person volunteering for the task, or a similar task.

>is still potential value in the general concept and in
>mechanisms that were lighter-weight and more about focusing
>discussions, reducing repetition, and educating participants
>than the Sergeant at Arms procedures.   If so, or we want to
>carry out _that_ experiment, the right next step is to reduce
>the workload to be more proportionate to both need and acutal
>value.

The experiment was light-weight, i.e avoid getting to Sergeant at 
Arms procedures.  Thanks for commenting about the potential value in 
the general concept.

>That said, the one thing I wish you had done but didn't (and may
>not have had the mandate to do) was to post those summaries with
>enough confidence, and presumption of community backing, to be
>able to say "these subthreads have been noted, continuing to
>post on them without adding anything new will be considered
>disruptive and turned over to the Sergeant at Arms".

I would be going beyond the experiment if I attempted to restrict a 
subscriber from posting more messages which did not contain new 
information.  It would also be at odds with the experiment being light-weight.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy