Re: AD presence on [e-mail] (was Re: Terminology discussion threads)

[S Moonesamy <[e-mail]>]

Hi Eric,
At 02:11 AM 20-08-2020, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote:
>Thank you for the interaction but I have to reply :-)
>
>Especially around "... most Area Directors do not  participate in 
>ietf@ discussions..."; my AD job takes 50+% of my time and I have a 
>day job on the top of it of course... So, it is not really easy to 
>read all emails on the top; I only read about 10% of them, 
>especially the first ones in a thread. Sorry, I am just a human 
>being and I wish that there were better ways to stay connected. And, 
>I know that my AD peers do the same, trying to get a feeling of the 
>community. BTW, I personally prefer open mike sessions to this list 
>as it is easy to forget that human being(s) behind an email address 
>while on a virtual plenary you 'see' the human beings.
>
>About "when Area Directors decide what they believe is right without 
>being accountable for their decisions", I am afraid that I disagree 
>at least when an AD takes a decision on his/her own (like a DISCUSS 
>or a YES in a review). I tend to agree with you when the whole IESG 
>takes a decision as it is a group decision.

Sometimes people come to my region and make fancy speeches.  Some of 
those people invoke the name of the IETF in their speeches.  I listen 
to them attentively.  Most, if not all, of those speakers do not have 
a presence on this mailing list.  On a few occasions people ask me 
what I think about one of those speeches.  This is where I explain a 
few things which I have learned over the years.

There are advantages, as you mentioned, for mic presence, e.g. verbal 
communication conveys cues which we cannot pick from an email message.

It is time-consuming to read mailing lists.  At some point it does 
not make sense to do that unless the person can make money out of 
that activity.  A few days ago, I had a conversation about mailing 
lists.  The person was reluctant to engage on mailing lists as people 
only wanted to read comments which suit what they are advocating 
for.  In the above, you mentioned the time constraints in setting 
time aside for this mailing list.  I haven't been reading this 
mailing list on a regular basis as I also face some time 
constraints.  I don't send messages partly because of the time 
constraints and partly because of the censorship 
regime.  Furthermore, it makes economic sense to limit the export of 
indigenous IPR.

The point on which you and I disagree is about consultation.  I once 
did a consultation (unrelated to the IETF) which received a low 
feedback.  Although I believed that what was being proposed was 
right, I did not advocate strongly for the proposal because of the 
lack of feedback.  The rationale for that is based on a 
UNDP-sponsored study which highlighted a policy-making failure.  The 
last point which you made is about group decision-making.  In 
general, it is better to stick to that.

Regards,
S, Moonesamy