Re: It'll come back to personal relations more

[Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo <[e-mail]>]

Thanks for your thoughtful post @Lars.

I think that what Carsten mentions could be a useful addition to IETF 
process.

I also happen to believe that one of the best weapons against AI Slop 
is... drums... yes, AI. One that is properly tuned to IETF style, 
practices, content, etc. Attach an score or even better a set of metrics 
to each -00 and let people make up their minds.

thanks

/Carlos

On 9/3/26 3:46 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> On Sep 3, 2026, at 08:05, Lars Eggert <lars=[e-mail]> wrote:
>> If more people in the community will do this, which I think is not unreasonable, the downside may be that the IETF will become *less* open to new participants, and not more. Genuine new participants with worthwhile ideas will have a harder time being spotted in the “AI slop”, and that’d be a shame. How can we fix *that*?
> The subject has the answer…
>
> I believe that at some point we’ll have to invest in supporting some automated support for attention management.
> Documents should be able to receive *commendations* from individuals.
> Not just Boolean, but maybe tentative assessments such as this is interesting vs. this is good vs. weak interest vs. interest in the subject but maybe not the specific approach taken...
>
> Datatracker should be enabled to maintain some weight score for potential commenders, based on the individual configuration of a logged-in viewer.
> Objective criteria that might be available to go into the per-viewer configurations include authorship of approved documents, past and present leadership positions etc.
> (Definitely don’t use the term reputation for these commender weights :-).
>
> It should be possible to sort document search results by a document weight that is computed by tallying the individually computed commender weights of the commenders of each document (probably adding in weight points the document authors hold directly), possibly modulated by some freshness score.
> These document weights are *subjective* and *private*:
> They should only be available to holders of datatracker accounts, and need to be highly configurable by these, so nobody is going to see the same attention scores.
>
> Grüße, Carsten