Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're famous
Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Fri, 16 April 2021 15:47 UTC
Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
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 3E1FD3A2A5A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 08:47:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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=kumari-net.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 kkPWbxvIQvw2 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 08:47:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x129.google.com (mail-lf1-x129.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::129]) (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 4C4673A2A57 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 08:47:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x129.google.com with SMTP id g8so45502407lfv.12 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 08:47:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=djaD4rdIpHXygTHlr+Qk8y8ZjOCmJS77IHL+NdZJpig=; b=TetUVgBzMlDvsUNJ78kmyIhHSlcE8j/tr2/vbDhwNmN9JW9FS6DXSHQ9uaPUf4QACu D5k2L/1+sX6ak/+SQg5bWfKAJQF74aOJTMQl0XcF63ItksiQb1QLW2p/LQf8l1OpGqUX CxL33CMKdVinkT8L0alTHlbfcC2420y1jEd/o5CugpQSHeY1OynNn88j3iO64EomqLwQ pNLUd7Mkiy7FtjVQWhLsfu3X6Eyr6rzIeDQDrlf+AdwB3aTJjzdgliWW3Qcm2lN4V3u7 +3SfVSHTD/rxmiHuA67iZ2m8t1+d6FS7yrRSt8xGsOcmOsN/KYVYNWKbKMKXSs6mIEnR 3poA==
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=djaD4rdIpHXygTHlr+Qk8y8ZjOCmJS77IHL+NdZJpig=; b=hpmbhfZ3x+jIPVrzBSwHTveH4sGcRN8XkMJtYNXrEv44VpqW6yIxZYp9HGMQ7lY0PL nbU8DztDN9ASCpIdoH1Eb/cf4eri5oe9s6asJrV084dHf+SlWIpmPw18yb8XGx5ih+rm 8/dZYKqbU89/wI9BJ3RenzK2fDyfYBnl9pB9isFhBqrl+av/vP53FooCqbssPl6xKcHo HqZSKa8c4ZZ5kos/0/iQ4acQPGU1FKaj7MjrqLmLk9C4V5ftn4mL0jjGHXt5fdS8IC+I kCVAjMMfZ+KuAdrvingaGRJV1LsEn+F9p8A0Cwbewpfo1nDHR4mm7fI2imOISFlK1oIu BxJg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530QiOZ+KSaRvht0NGsVEoQdAO9ghtP1QN4NetUtR0TNtmNxONb0 xSRlBKED3AWyJZwF++nu5b+9kfsMn6S36vFuWGzNENVrO/I9pg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx53sCYFYWOI+xXDMR34Mj71HVo6isJKj6GZ/TcmTClPNS5k534Qd2t+Fi39LShovYtMrXwEJlSi4In2V0A/SU=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:c509:: with SMTP id w9mr3329058lfe.484.1618588069536; Fri, 16 Apr 2021 08:47:49 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210414185927.07A6E72E4243@ary.qy> <8ae469dd-a94e-73b5-412c-7f08730fc5e2@petit-huguenin.org> <25A6DF1D-5772-4DB9-8E0B-C549157DF666@akamai.com> <CAHw9_iKcacK-gsmL9P_yBuyeGYnB44j1=TxF=VnG3Uu65JKJcQ@mail.gmail.com> <10C5497B-FCC3-45BE-B6A7-EE3A1C1D6883@akamai.com> <f02a58f3-ff79-3f3f-fc31-7aa17f7d14aa@mtcc.com> <698cf4f7-de67-8efb-a944-b29da42dca31@network-heretics.com> <dc7ff33f-a007-7afe-7d1b-92a242b7c799@mtcc.com> <aaebce66-6318-dc16-b8b0-5a7d7e3361a3@network-heretics.com>
In-Reply-To: <aaebce66-6318-dc16-b8b0-5a7d7e3361a3@network-heretics.com>
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 11:47:12 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHw9_iK8vFWZ9PpYjLFLMF0KAT96WZ9tvQ0qrdi+-mW2WhjpNw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're famous
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Cc: IETF Discuss <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ec3fe705c018e606"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/frn2fnbjQXY9GfMuIr91tfYlrCw>
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, 16 Apr 2021 15:47:57 -0000
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 8:54 PM Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> wrote: > On 4/15/21 8:37 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: > > > I've found that newcomers are much more likely to be taken favorably if > they're well-prepared. > > > Well, the nature of a newcomer is that they **won't** be well prepared. > It's sort of the nature of the beast. > > Disagree. They won't know everything, of course, but if they know enough > about the subject matter to clearly know what they're talking about, > they're much more likely to be taken seriously. > Yup - but it's not just the subject matter, it's also some of the history/culture/etc. I *always* recommend that newcomers read the Tao ( https://www.ietf.org/about/participate/tao/). It's much much less scary to participate if you have at least some vague idea how the system works. Even "silly" things like dress code (doesn't really apply any more), what the dots mean, what a blue sheet is, etc. Knowing some of this stuff makes people feel more like insiders, instead of wondering why people keep humming, or shouting "Mike!!!" And the problem of participants not being well-prepared isn't at all > limited to newcomers to IETF. > Indeed. As with any group, we have our own "culture" and clique - we have tried to make it easier for people to come in (see the Tao, Scott Bradner's Newcomer videos, Edu team, Mentors, etc). We've done more than some other groups I can think of, but it can still be intimidating. W > Keith > > > > -- The computing scientist’s main challenge is not to get confused by the complexities of his own making. -- E. W. Dijkstra
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… John Levine
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Salz, Rich
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Bron Gondwana
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Eliot Lear
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Salz, Rich
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Jim Fenton
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Bron Gondwana
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Salz, Rich
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Bron Gondwana
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Nico Williams
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Nico Williams
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… John Levine
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Christian Huitema
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Stephen Farrell
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Victor Kuarsingh
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Livingood, Jason
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Dan Harkins
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Nico Williams
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Colin Perkins
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Masataka Ohta
- RE: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Vasilenko Eduard
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… tom petch
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Salz, Rich
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… John R Levine
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Theodore Ts'o
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Salz, Rich
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- motivation to "join" IETF (was: the old fellowshi… Keith Moore
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Leif Johansson
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Warren Kumari
- RE: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Michael McBride
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Salz, Rich
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Michael Thomas
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Keith Moore
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Wes Hardaker
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Michael Thomas
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Michael Thomas
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Keith Moore
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Michael Thomas
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Keith Moore
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… scott
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Michael Thomas
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Michael Thomas
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Keith Moore
- New-comers (was Re: the old fellowship program) Andrew Sullivan
- Re: New-comers (was Re: the old fellowship progra… John C Klensin
- Re: New-comers (was Re: the old fellowship progra… Ole Jacobsen
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Fernando Gont
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Fernando Gont
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Fernando Gont
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Fernando Gont
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Fernando Gont
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Brian Carpenter
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… S Moonesamy
- Re: motivation to "join" IETF (was: the old fello… Lars Eggert
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… tom petch
- RE: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Vasilenko Eduard
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Ofer Inbar
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Salz, Rich
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Warren Kumari
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Mary B
- RE: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… STARK, BARBARA H
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: the old fellowship program, was Wow, we're fa… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: New-comers (was Re: the old fellowship progra… John C Klensin
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… S Moonesamy
- Re: New-comers (was Re: the old fellowship progra… Michael Thomas
- RE: New-comers (was Re: the old fellowship progra… Larry Masinter
- Re: New-comers (was Re: the old fellowship progra… John C Klensin
- RE: New-comers (was Re: the old fellowship progra… Larry Masinter
- Re: New-comers (was Re: the old fellowship progra… Michael Thomas
- Re: New-comers (was Re: the old fellowship progra… Michael Richardson
- Re: New-comers (was Re: the old fellowship progra… Michael Thomas
- What's the alternative to "snarling"? (was: New-c… Keith Moore
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Bron Gondwana
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Bron Gondwana
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? (was: N… lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? (was: N… Keith Moore
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Ofer Inbar
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Keith Moore
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Leif Johansson
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Victor Kuarsingh
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? (was: N… Leif Johansson
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Masataka Ohta
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Keith Moore
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Keith Moore
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Leif Johansson
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Leif Johansson
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Keith Moore
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Keith Moore
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Dave Cridland
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Christian Huitema
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Salz, Rich
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Keith Moore
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Keith Moore
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Clint Chaplin
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Salz, Rich
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Randy Presuhn
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Keith Moore
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Michael Thomas
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Keith Moore
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Leif Johansson
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Michael Thomas
- Re: Wow, we're famous, was WG Review: Effective T… Ofer Inbar
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Randy Presuhn
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Keith Moore
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Michael Thomas
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Richard Shockey
- adapting IETF in light of github and similar tool… Keith Moore
- RE: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Larry Masinter
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Richard Shockey
- Re: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Leif Johansson
- Re: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … Lloyd W
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Dave Cridland
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Bron Gondwana
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Lloyd W
- Re: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … Keith Moore
- Re: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … John Levine
- Re: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … Salz, Rich
- Re: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … Nick Hilliard
- Re: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … Keith Moore
- Re: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … Eliot Lear
- RE: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … Larry Masinter
- Re: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … Fred Baker
- Re: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Jay Daley
- Re: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … Jay Daley
- Re: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … Lloyd W
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Bron Gondwana
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Jay Daley
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Bron Gondwana
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? Brian E Carpenter
- Re: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … Martin J. Dürst
- Re: adapting IETF in light of github and similar … Nick Hilliard