Re: Consultation on *revised* IETF LLC Draft Strategic Plan 2020

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Wed, 03 June 2020 22:09 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.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 32D223A0781 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 15:09:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 ltUMNGbu_3FW for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 15:09:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x230.google.com (mail-lj1-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C9DD3A077F for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 15:09:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x230.google.com with SMTP id 9so4737759ljc.8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 03 Jun 2020 15:09:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=K27J/yAH8fU96leR1uw16vXWqW2z7LXotrpmUyT5EeY=; b=y1890iX9gQ8zS7/ShOe9XHLYZI8+06KCzJb+9SodzVz7Cg7zzB9AcHdxFSfwHGQqJM VVCUCa8VjqC151tX7/BKOeKAS1EbhiitvdPrPBabR61pDGSNGDBIm/3XIcEV0qCi7wGc nsKPRhYR+MtCCWmac4wp+1gx1O6O3wwJS+0WcalCHlfQE9zttGfQBovPfx4wnqds6Fm/ NM8OtNTqHsYPUWfindLWWwF1n4khbiovRwHUxPyJrKYigWzkzUC1KQKacFVeC8Ik2N5g TVh0tDuB03KH5IuRbRIYpIcUbhbbjTfIm7XalbdPvtI2a+EErTXYTjFHvi3f15gPFKPt 5RnQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=K27J/yAH8fU96leR1uw16vXWqW2z7LXotrpmUyT5EeY=; b=VHwGCswAe/9Y7+//cAHLREV9ip1mYuJb6lhZwdaKf67pmPBTVGm9TzWyUvoeDAdOMN LClKoaLL08D3EIGgDVfVL0XoUaujzYxJu4Tx2YROCyzoybgp9aeHmDMYZ27B9g/+kZPZ DLiPloVgLnsPpHtpj8r2Y5u2VxGqWnHqzDSjEOS7POrZgM5Hsc7Oma/1hRXYwS8KWVbE 2sB0lgZUOR6RUMKGuJomqLtxpcJ9BzUpxRrbX1XSQJ+/RxPdZeveYVp6cyOsGvXaVdgh oEk1s/pTWw/pRVBvVxguD86eI6I1pbekMXI7Z7t5XWK8wWKI6SzFnk9QwKAZ4XGSDGBd ROFQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530UieLK/lxO0l/xyMHY5Ss7f34HVIsxbWn3Ant/0i8ER5DKPtvv JF8jajYKa7/O/18JH6T7aP8SPMKAiIrurkIuj6MweEEUHr8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwvxB7EmN0AVLKHIsLYfojzDVMRE3XEOQVsE5rF5ciNFSBUIEwlOPiTq2Yc/S5znNvoZaq8FrhTKUHqLnTN+kw=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:3609:: with SMTP id d9mr569738lja.409.1591222152431; Wed, 03 Jun 2020 15:09:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <159115348321.13976.12703268950916172390@ietfa.amsl.com> <5435ade6-fdaa-4793-e5cd-438f6a0298d4@cs.tcd.ie> <1FE0EF67-6AC8-424B-8E30-5B85C931B230@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <1FE0EF67-6AC8-424B-8E30-5B85C931B230@ietf.org>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2020 15:08:35 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBMPPT2hYEKTpXbX0MusOS97Rq3==xMnPKDbO1mhuVA-TA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Consultation on *revised* IETF LLC Draft Strategic Plan 2020
To: Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org>
Cc: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, ietf <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000027beb905a735479c"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/P33Fc26tU-VnOd5zmtKaiCnHJJA>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 03 Jun 2020 22:09:16 -0000

On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 12:44 PM Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org> wrote:

>
>
> On 4/06/2020, at 2:26 AM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
> wrote:
>
>
> - I can't see how all the stuff about "participant journey"
> isn't either waffle or over-reach, e.g. if "Fully documented
> participant journey" meant that the someone thinks IETFers are
> going to only follow paths set-out in such a document, that's
> silly and over-reach. If it doesn't mean that then what's it
> for? I suggest removing the term and replacing each occurrence
> with whatever is really meant in each case (or with nothing).
> (And then re-reviewing.)
>
>
> My answer may unintentionally come across as rude.
>
> It appears that you are unfamiliar with the concept of user journeys
> (which, as Ekr has pointed out, is renamed to "participant journey" to be
> more IETF specific).  These are an important tool in understanding how
> people interact with systems, whether those systems are organisational or
> technological.  The details of a user journey are quite simple, as
> explained in the strategy:
>
> "a map of the different stages of participation (e.g. newcomer,
> leadership), at what stages people start their participation in the IETF,
> how they transition between them and at what stages they end their
> participation.  "
>

Given that you named me I want to flag that I actually don't think that the
effort you describe here is particularly appropriate  in this case. Trying
to think of the entire spectrum of participation as a set of stages that
people go through is not helpful IMO. It's not really a linear process and
people want different things at different points in their careers and
that's fine, so I don't think that a map of this kind is going to generate
much insight.

As I said, I do think it's important to have clear maps for how the
individual tasks that people want to do work and where they go wrong, which
is sort of a small scale version of this.

-Ekr