IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@ietf.org

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Fri, 07 June 2013 15:48 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@yumaworks.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 6B25C21F94D3 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 08:48:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.144
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.144 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.833, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h5x3kPLpzlrd for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 08:48:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-x236.google.com (mail-pb0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F083821F9485 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 08:48:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f54.google.com with SMTP id ro2so4846614pbb.27 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 07 Jun 2013 08:48:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=ja3VtiUSf4cfmNxsPpVMBHMyFvPFgpgHVQAqYgvnRUs=; b=Jl4D+7+HlXzOB/UrXEML+g+otjWfTwANnpWIdWfL6a5GxpgkkAI1dxy/LK17i7fczj eNdkzgYHb8J1FtBF+lKJPj9jdbpZEO1HLNXp9a91U4gCVVcjutAnPKkT77lq8GYiPkjV dplbA3krlgGc2N9hvgV6kmtPz0sMBpVU6iStZphWcQAo24XNpNJx/8uG+olmGez0W7VB tMKwE7mXoxXbJuQds3WY7aiPwfT+BPtnwF40HW+le4gKPW4A30bi82Ac/vzvOBeMQETc Qz6WQrhIugPjWPWnEdhkucvlFBpOThdgTTo0X48/LQepyRKRdiAQMtPNgyhnr/TugEIO g+6w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.66.82.162 with SMTP id j2mr3397936pay.168.1370620085482; Fri, 07 Jun 2013 08:48:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.70.87.103 with HTTP; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 08:48:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201306071449.r57EnN5N008971@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
References: <201306070453.r574r3Wt010088@rotala.raleigh.ibm.com> <CADnDZ89FjyPtvJQSqY+kmX+1KYkc0jo1mRpOgkfcEnTH6Vbg6A@mail.gmail.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751CA462@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <201306071449.r57EnN5N008971@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 08:48:05 -0700
Message-ID: <CABCOCHSkLj0409hyeqKNdomOdrScYypi_7a1xWqMEUV9eTPuCw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@ietf.org
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
To: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f46d042de633514d1204de925b0b"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnUzJQ1jbeQHJ83SoEvMMnjdQR+FDyLa2EqUygPp+NaB779si9vG39ZXDKU9Fq+clA8tffB
Cc: "<ietf@ietf.org>" <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: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 15:48:06 -0000

On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:49 AM, Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> What the weekly stats really ought to tally up is the readers/postings
> ratio, so that folk would get more direct feedback as to whether what they
> are
> posting is actually being read...
>
> My strong suspicion would be that there is strong negative correlation
> between frequency of posts and actual readers of those posts...
>
> Also, I suspect that many people do not realize that a significant
> chunk of IETF contributers are no longer subscribed to the ietf list
> due to signal to noise ratio concerns...
>
>
So why not move the signal?
Put IETF Last Call mail on last-call@ietf.org and leave this list for
everything else.

I don't really want people counting their bytes when they are concerned
about
a technical issue in an I-D.  It may take several exchanges for a
disagreement
to be resolved.  Social pressure to stay out of the top-N report could have
a negative impact on last call debates.


Thomas
>
>
Andy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email