IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Fri, 11 November 2016 13:18 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
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 99313129678 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 05:18:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.798
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.798 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
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 nQHEvchc-A_F for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 05:18:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 588261293F5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 05:18:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AB8EBE38; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 13:18:36 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id chAUUkg14dyt; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 13:18:35 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [134.226.36.93] (bilbo.dsg.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.36.93]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 91121BE2F; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 13:18:35 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1478870315; bh=9hvh43rIiZpnU7uTBTCURIh0pj9mmNDjrYh/iTPmEDQ=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=zW9JyK0Q+ePR3eCupK8DkVrKxlrbJEw77TkD0borvqUmVHeAgTMfYPzW6BV8cOgxz o1ErgLyyppr0erm/zs4cI+h7FhPZ3rMbIjIDGuwKTBwz5JXPBk45w5n8l5awdCj3iG DQm6CdbWrfvQKKTUZMJscAlDSyG7n9Te5Sz41Bgo=
Subject: Re: Please welcome the facilitators at ietf@ietf.org
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>, ietf@ietf.org
References: <29F4A6D4-AD5B-4409-9EDA-D8761DE243CE@ietf.org> <6.2.5.6.2.20161109103948.0b6fe0e0@resistor.net>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <73748ab8-d91a-629d-4806-e2de1e02d853@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 13:18:35 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20161109103948.0b6fe0e0@resistor.net>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="------------ms070404090604020703020502"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/LkKnsLoL4ap1byKyNiW8VXmgMuc>
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 13:18:41 -0000


On 09/11/16 19:16, S Moonesamy wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Please see the message at
> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg97290.html for
> context.  This message is not copied to the IETF Chair as he will read
> this thread.
> 
> At 14:22 23-03-2016, IETF Chair wrote:
>> This arrangement is an experiment that we intend to review after some
>> time to determine both feasibility for the facilitators and perceived
>> impacts.
> 
> Seven months has elapsed since this experiment started.  If I am asked
> whether the experiment had any perceived impact, my answer would be that
> the impact is insignificant.

Actually I thought it was maybe sorta working ok. However,
the interesting question is how we'd even know if it is
or is not working given that "working" here essentially
mean noise reduction.

If anyone (facilitators or others) had feedback to the
effect that, but for a facilitator email, someone would
have replied to some thread realising (possibly in
retrospect) that such a reply was probably unproductive,
then that could be useful to know maybe.

S.

>  In terms of feasibility, it is a
> significant effort to read the ietf@ietf.org mailing list daily for a
> long period of time to determine when there is an issue and when to step
> in.  It does not make sense to pursue this experiment if it did not
> bring anything positive to the subscribers of this mailing list.
> 
> Could you please send some feedback about whether it is useful to have
> Facilitators for ietf@ietf.org?
> 
> Regards,
> S. Moonesamy
>

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status