Re: Simplifying our processes: Conference Calls

SM <sm@resistor.net> Mon, 03 December 2012 21:39 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@resistor.net>
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 0F43521F894F for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 13:39:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.635
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.635 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.036, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uEirqrmp1HBY for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 13:39:40 -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 7A2F621F85C9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 13:39:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qB3LdVYQ015691; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 13:39:34 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1354570777; bh=W44vcz5l2yP775DTGWdeTy4Qg9u9sQqT0MBoTbMIdeg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=3pELkPeGn+gDxe3aFSCMgw/ZLEWg4SL+eY2AhlCIhROz6IgManEVbkkiAIWMJNlyu wua0Zrnzw7/nkyPLBeyOeSPkxgC2bdc8bNhIP+iJ4TkeC5pQvNvo8wydA+vukL6MrJ QwwksoKBsz/xFZ2hGJvCeM7Z8aP6f+tPqV0AxhOs=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1354570777; i=@resistor.net; bh=W44vcz5l2yP775DTGWdeTy4Qg9u9sQqT0MBoTbMIdeg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=nzy6QCsaaj13vzwMH8pRvJjxEEiOfautDf3G8exMHYgSqPGpK1nmxxgzGFEYeRuN0 mHWZpayc6joHHfy/9tz6ILmfUu5hZZIx+3fWJxeWm5iV4vj8uFxetf7S93MQohPZVT cYwQhBc/jdL3+GdUOOENQBGFfkf0B3U7wEC4K+Sg=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20121203123043.0a21d408@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 13:27:50 -0800
To: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
From: SM <sm@resistor.net>
Subject: Re: Simplifying our processes: Conference Calls
In-Reply-To: <4CA77187-1B4C-4F62-9F62-00CD213690D8@gmx.net>
References: <84D0B79A-6D53-47DD-99B8-BC6C18614C74@gmx.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20121203093517.0a1bdc38@resistor.net> <4CA77187-1B4C-4F62-9F62-00CD213690D8@gmx.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 21:39:41 -0000

Hi Hannes,
At 11:37 03-12-2012, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
>Any data that supports your argument? Are there people subscribed to 
>the IETF announce list who just wait for conference calls they can join.

Please do not read this as data.  There are about five messages daily 
about webfinger from non-subscribers.  I doubt that these individuals 
are subscribed to the IETF announce mailing list.

>With the same argument we should just forward every "interesting" 
>mail from the working group just in case that someone on the IETF 
>announcement list cares about it.

If I understood correctly it was a question of "meetings" and not 
"interesting" messages.

>If you do not follow the mailing list how likely is it that you will 
>understand the discussions during the conference call?

It's unlikely that I would be able to understand the discussions if I 
have not read the mailing list.

Regards,
-sm