IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: RFC Series Editor Resignation

"Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@comcast.com> Fri, 28 June 2019 15:28 UTC

Return-Path: <Jason_Livingood@comcast.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 9C62D1200B5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 08:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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=comcast.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 hagV92okGf2z for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 08:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from copdcmhout02.cable.comcast.com (copdcmhout02.cable.comcast.com [96.114.158.212]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 304C312004A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 08:28:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=comcast.com; s=20190412; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@comcast.com; t=1561735734; x=2425649334; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:CC:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=n711QRh9uMTdxmllHUHv/SQEISHbN7mkOUr67gqT+aM=; b=TV/sNtzORRnhn09HyUJRU3KfhfARAfNyvrdwvpm3RdXJi2y1ENtWvkrcA8xhGH9g nUQNCzxqw3n0sIG87zTEYzKAMJss9xrvt/Kfr8di/ygWqOarwCjQD1I4o6hn2yWi PcYUXN5KFDx8X6aB/hXZVGoO0pfzeXGE40Sgl/JWqS1aAQJpJ70e7HA2MmzAnx3T RPVEI7QZ+C687aF1mdBkFU8aGI4KpxR38T5oUk67Whfw8uoNyTtrJzE1johv7z1T bJnc1YfeV4V5N49A3dNUV5yKiHfv2fZNlA5w9wTjxqLdFgYUUTCEBe6QZZ+mYMtt HDoj5vquKcCrp2C5d4iFpA==;
X-AuditID: 60729ed4-f05ff7000000add3-63-5d1632364ab9
Received: from COPDCEXC40.cable.comcast.com (copdcmhoutvip.cable.comcast.com [96.114.156.147]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by copdcmhout02.cable.comcast.com (SMTP Gateway) with SMTP id BC.3B.44499.632361D5; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 09:28:54 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from COPDCEXC37.cable.comcast.com (147.191.125.136) by COPDCEXC40.cable.comcast.com (147.191.125.139) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 11:28:53 -0400
Received: from COPDCEXC37.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::3aea:a7ff:fe36:8a94]) by COPDCEXC37.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::3aea:a7ff:fe36:8a94%15]) with mapi id 15.01.1713.006; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 11:28:53 -0400
From: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@comcast.com>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se>
CC: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: RFC Series Editor Resignation
Thread-Topic: RFC Series Editor Resignation
Thread-Index: AQHVJikVsQd2Jts3Pk+2iawYOYIXzKavU44AgAAG0ICAADc8AIABrnaA
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:28:53 +0000
Message-ID: <EA13A490-2636-459F-919B-8A72F4F45174@cable.comcast.com>
References: <685B34F6-E0E2-4050-B9DD-615F475F62B7@encrypted.net> <6E58094ECC8D8344914996DAD28F1CCD18D3A5CF@dggemm526-mbx.china.huawei.com> <8CDEE96C-B1DA-4991-B8AA-A2455B705B77@mnt.se> <34F6E9B8-2BC2-46AC-8AF8-EFDA552D659D@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <34F6E9B8-2BC2-46AC-8AF8-EFDA552D659D@tzi.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.19.0.190512
x-originating-ip: [68.87.29.7]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <3FE5CCA25FC6D3448AE75EF724526411@comcast.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Forward
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrIKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsWSUDRnsq6ZkViswe1FphZHptxltXi2cT6L RWPfDGYHZo8lS34yeWxanuoxbVFmAHNUA6NNSUZRamKJS2paal5xqh2XAgawSUpNyy9KdU0s yqkMSs1JTcSuDKQyJTUnsyy1SB+rMfpYzUnoYsp4MG8/Y8EB/orvu86wNjD28HcxcnJICJhI /HqzjaWLkYtDSOAIk8S1KUuYIZwWJok3y3+wQjinGSWu7DrBDNLCJmAmcXfhFTBbRMBR4unf 14wgNrOAssSXOW/YQGxhAS2Jrb92sEPUaEuc+3uDCcJ2k7jz9TaYzSKgKnG6cQlQDQcHr4CL xIWJQhC73jJKXOrvAJvPKWAtMX/xZDCbUUBM4vupNUwQu8Qlbj2ZzwTxgoDEkj3nmSFsUYmX j/+xgtiiAvoSP7bfZIOIy0nMfX2PBWQXs4CmxPpd+hBjrCRan3RCjVSUmNL9EOxkXgFBiZMz n7BAtIpLHD6yg3UCo+QsJJtnIUyahWTSLCSTZiGZtICRdRUjn6WZnqGhiZ6hqYWekaHRJkZw Qpp3ZQfj5ekehxgFOBiVeHhbvovGCrEmlhVX5h5ilOBgVhLhlTwnEivEm5JYWZValB9fVJqT WnyIUZqDRUmct7hZOFZIID2xJDU7NbUgtQgmy8TBKdXAGJarEj5x1qOW59ZVMx5Knfrdbr8y Rsbm1K0Nfee/SThd/LVt9uwHOaeqc3fustgyV5N1/ddFaueEd5T/4VlSdk3k+UM3i+BJG99e vdR3Xn3B4ZyjB0o13yxL8KjkLwnpZ80z3HSO3T2s20vHYNNBj3NVfduUk0LmnwzW5NhyPdw7 aK1CyvYp95RYijMSDbWYi4oTAbfZMhZEAwAA
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/UmZii_3mUIavLoeXDR9mHMYn-l0>
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: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:28:58 -0000

On 6/27/19, 5:48 AM, "ietf on behalf of Carsten Bormann" <ietf-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

    On Jun 27, 2019, at 08:30, Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se> wrote:
    >> 
    >> Personally I think accountability has value.
    
>    There is a difference between backward accountability (blame assignment) and forward accountability (making sure the mistake is not made again, which implies understanding the mistake and why it was made in the first place).  I agree the latter has value.

+1 to that. In my day job I've personally made mistakes that led to customer-impacting outages, as have my teams, and it is often natural for folks to fear being blamed (and fired/sanctioned). Few good ideas or discussion arise when everyone is in a defensive and/or attacking state of mind. And so I always liked to say *** "let's fix the problem, not the blame" ***. I have found that to be a constructive way re-frame a discussion, and thus to look ahead and ask how we can prevent this from occurring in the future. Usually a situation developed because some process was flawed or due to a lack alignment between responsibility & accountability, etc. This also means granting a bit of trust in colleagues and acknowledging that everyone is doing their best to achieve what they think will best serve the situation/platform/org/etc. This can be hard to do, but it is a healthy step that can make an org stronger.

Jason

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email