IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Moderation on ietf@ietf.org

Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com> Tue, 22 July 2014 17:28 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0364B1B2AEB; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 10:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 COXyJnjiSkj0; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 10:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com (shell-too.nominum.com [64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE1071A002A; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 10:28:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 714271B85B5; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 10:28:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E0B5190060; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 10:28:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nat64.meeting.ietf.org (31.130.238.218) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.100) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Tue, 22 Jul 2014 10:28:53 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: Moderation on ietf@ietf.org
From: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140722170725.8F7D21B2A21@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 13:28:51 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <195EB430-59E6-4E3C-9F2B-FE2D6EF11990@nominum.com>
References: <8365BC9B-E28F-49B6-B374-1D6DBCA2C2E8@ietf.org> <CAMm+LwhEVgLrzuUq6aByfTzJyYrLo=cKjCh-82h0-xzTzFb+BQ@mail.gmail.com> <2EC025CA-3722-4C88-98C9-61CAA96B401D@ietf.org> <20140722170725.8F7D21B2A21@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-Originating-IP: [31.130.238.218]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/8wneFTYLBfeWFrQswXPaVOPhN1g
Cc: IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 22 Jul 2014 17:28:57 -0000

On Jul 22, 2014, at 1:07 PM, Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net> wrote:
> We're considering approaches to manage noise on the IETF list.  One possibility discussed by the IESG is providing moderators to remonstrate with the noise producers prior to action by the sergeant-at-arms.  The IESG would like to solicit comments on this and also solicit guidance on other possibilities prior to making any decision

As Spencer said, this is good text.   However, it's worth noting that we /really do/ have a problem here, and we need to do something about it.   What Pete proposed was /really/ mild: he proposed that when people exhibit certain behavior patterns, they be asked to step back--to count to ten, as Vint said.   Is that actually an unreasonable thing to be doing?

I agree with the hall monitor comment--we really don't want to turn this into a new, improved IETF bullying system.   If that's what this looks like to people who are objecting, we probably ought to try to figure out why, and whether there's something we can do to mitigate that concern.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email