Re: Weekly posting summary for [e-mail]

[David Morris <[e-mail]>]

It seems to me that you have missed the fact that the IETF is a
volunteer organization. The vast majority of us appreciate that
Thomas creates this summary. If you feel different information
would be useful, then create your own report and share the results,
to at least to see if your version is desired. Thomas provided
a link in the earlier discussion to his code so I imagine you could
use that as a starting point. 

You might also find it helpful to review the terms of the IETF Note Well
which you agreed to when you joined this list. You lose control of
anything you contribute so making demands about how that information
is used is pointless.

On Fri, 21 Jun 2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:

> Hi Stewart,
> 
> I don't have any problem with the report/reminder only that it has missing
> important information. The subjects of discussions are not counted, so I
> counted them. Also the report does not distinguish between general-posting
> and replying to IETF LCs.
> 
> AB
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> >
> > AB
> >
> > Thomas started posting these weekly reports many years
> > ago as a service to the community to remind us all that
> > posting to [e-mail] contributes to the information
> > and work overload of the IETF community as a whole.
> >
> > The numbers are a reminder to think carefully about what
> > you send to the list and to only send what you consider
> > to be sufficiently important that the community as
> > a whole needs to be aware of it.
> >
> > Most members of the IETF community  try their best to
> > minimize their so called "Narten Number". Many
> > regard these postings as a useful service, and I for
> > one, thank him for doing it.
> >
> > - Stewart
> >
>