Re: [Fwd: Re: Changes needed to Last Call boilerplate]

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Mon, 16 February 2009 12:58 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86D7F3A695F for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 04:58:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DcNv5+Vb7S+K for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 04:58:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE0493A67F3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 04:58:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BA4039E2C0; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:58:19 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BKp4bxmJoATA; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:58:19 +0100 (CET)
Received: from hta-warp.trd.corp.google.com (unknown [195.18.164.170]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEB5439E296; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:58:18 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <499962EA.9020002@alvestrand.no>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:58:18 +0100
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090105)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Changes needed to Last Call boilerplate]
References: <49952C21.3070607@ripe.net> <49959458.2040208@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <49959458.2040208@piuha.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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, 16 Feb 2009 12:58:11 -0000

Jari Arkko wrote:
>
> Despite currently excessive number of comments, I think we should 
> invite more comments and make it easier, not harder to send them. Even 
> if traffic on the list is now too high and information content per 
> message is low, in general our average number of comments in the IETF 
> Last Call stage is too low.
>
> I don't have a problem with the number of messages. Deleting is easy. 
> But I wouldn't mind stricter enforcement of the Subject lines...
>
> Note that this opinion is entirely separate from the value of the 
> comments. Repetition and mail bombing is not valuable. Well justified 
> opinions are very valuable. The latter may come from both inside and 
> outside the IETF; sometimes experts on some topic can be persuaded to 
> send in a comment, but not to subscribe to lists or engage in lengthy 
> debate. 
I think anyone who posts to the IETF list should have his unsubscribe 
function disabled for a week.
That seems like a punishment that fits the crime.

(despite the obvious workarounds)

                  Harald