Re: Old directions in social media.

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Sat, 09 January 2021 10:11 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.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 0118B3A1165 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Jan 2021 02:11:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.973
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.973 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.373, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 v-jytVt4P3vx for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Jan 2021 02:11:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-3.cisco.com (aer-iport-3.cisco.com [173.38.203.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D32D3A1160 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 9 Jan 2021 02:11:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2607; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1610187065; x=1611396665; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc: to:references; bh=bE5PSO03OQiHQxZiZbjoYvLcbUTTpbtHunPtAegoh0E=; b=hESMCWn3dGTlk6V9GbglJTwrVfEJ+kflUV6oNjs1Cql/pOG7OQ/VudaU Nr3QNsbFgdR2uWzFVtHD4S3xfZw/ewGvOrL3aVg1BkKvnMgowDaRoR3KZ 6X7vzGve4qzLYD/W3/VuKvR5VWkI7F9TbbvNuD0GI6/095YEU46qO/+Hl I=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 488
X-IPAS-Result: A0A/BgCTgPlf/xbLJq1iHgEBCxIMhgcBIBIuhD+JBIgSKJpUgWgEBwEBAQoDAQEvBAEBhEoCgXEmOBMCAwEBAQMCAwEBAQEFAQEBAgEGBHGFbYVzAQEBAwEjVgULCxgqAgJXBhODJgGCZiCsSnaBMoVYhHkQgTiBU4tYQYIAgTgMEIFYfj6EAAkBEgGDOTSCLASDazACRAuBf5tknCqDAIMngTeXAQMfol+xYoNvAgQGBQIWgW0jZ3AzGggbFWUBgj4+EhkNVpwVQAMwNwIGAQkBAQMJjVUBAQ
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,333,1602547200"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="30087291"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-2.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 09 Jan 2021 10:11:01 +0000
Received: from ams3-vpn-dhcp7032.cisco.com (ams3-vpn-dhcp7032.cisco.com [10.61.91.119]) by aer-core-2.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 109AB0r2016256 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 9 Jan 2021 10:11:01 GMT
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <36194953-6EF4-44F0-BCE1-BEE5C229F332@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_922D5DA2-2050-4694-8903-9F46965A7F5B"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha256"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.40.0.2.32\))
Subject: Re: Old directions in social media.
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 2021 11:10:59 +0100
In-Reply-To: <7B4091640080A0755BBE576E@PSB>
Cc: The IETF List <ietf@ietf.org>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
References: <CAMm+Lwg1-pxKU8vMinFDUbVca52VgFzTOOSJMnJjaUJvF6PLew@mail.gmail.com> <062d01d6e387$39c46270$ad4d2750$@acm.org> <CAJU8_nWD3MwLs5aVNMi_3LqZysrfjv0N7N3ujV-zhqxiFh3tsA@mail.gmail.com> <788651ca-0c84-7a54-9c48-b962faed635f@network-heretics.com> <CAJU8_nXSE-E2AVrJnqe5ZifR+qGhXscNCFXQRDj_GU1r=hNOyw@mail.gmail.com> <70416f47-7c31-8571-02ce-f95ff386d54f@network-heretics.com> <X/TtgTtl02AMyns8@mit.edu> <AM0PR08MB371623409DE8AB03CC667234FAD00@AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <866b1357-ec50-7765-4277-fd4fba8d793e@network-heretics.com> <AM0PR08MB37166B8E57C293917737D9D6FAD00@AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <d8454121-f6fb-3cbb-3149-656e20efce96@joelhalpern.com> <AM0PR08MB3716C960817BCCFEE4F9F911FAAF0@AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <edf8225b-d005-4f99-b96f-41bc49633da3@joelhalpern.com> <AM0PR08MB37169778B08F3F83413194B0FAAF0@AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <01RU3E1RGXW4004QVR@mauve.mrochek.com> <e3b4e262-9d4d-2c5c-5588-67d37d8cedc4@mtcc.com> <AM0PR08MB3716E884A0BF30D161E26750FAAE0@AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <82633D31-0168-4D51-9250-2C2697FF6AE7@cisco.com> <7B4091640080A0755BBE576E@PSB>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.40.0.2.32)
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 10.61.91.119, ams3-vpn-dhcp7032.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: aer-core-2.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/YGjNtOlsO5TO8MfsUi26KwNMGe4>
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: Sat, 09 Jan 2021 10:11:07 -0000

Hi John,

> On 9 Jan 2021, at 06:39, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:
>> ..
> 
> Eliot, it isn't just convenience.  More virtual meetings means
> more timezone problems and some people being excluded from the
> discussions even if only on a rotating basis.

This is what I was alluding to.  Yes, there’s a cost.

> And, however good
> the minutes or ability to play back recorded video, it is not as
> good as being able to make comments or insert an issue or
> perspective while the meeting is going on... and the topic might
> get lost by the next meeting.    So, whether by email, github,
> or something else (a separate topic and taking up most of the
> thread), mechanisms that allow input to be provided and
> discussed asynchronously [1] tend to work out better for
> high-quality participation of consideration of issues than many
> / frequent interim meetings.


I am not suggesting an “either/or”, but rather an amelioration of the partitioning associated with people picking their preferred mode of communication outside of meetings, so that any perceived formative discussions don’t go on too long without being picked up in an interactive discussion.  As you point out, there’s a price for that amelioration, which impacts people differently.

Absent such an amelioration, our alternatives seem to be to live with that partitioning or impose a common platform on everyone, making one group or another quite unhappy.  In an organization driven by rough consensus, that seems to be a challenge.  Do you see it differently?

Eliot