Re: [Mtgvenue] Interim step on meetings site feedback for sites currently under active consideration

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Tue, 19 April 2016 12:03 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.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 A812D12D656 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 05:03:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 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_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.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 8KE39E0wqPAw for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 05:03:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x234.google.com (mail-lf0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::234]) (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 F0EC412DD59 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 05:02:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x234.google.com with SMTP id g184so15917078lfb.3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 05:02:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=bkw17dICZlyzCbYHiq9dIhnaZq1I0yg/GLFlXICHkHs=; b=n+gkBTlEISuAwieXO1ONvSXRwDKqatZfpsSqctzGQ9MwgZJN+jQTjao3cVaIR9ShOH Ds5l0SbZ08/0AAl1t/aYPlegL/W7zpBZjPig+aiBEPIr5HsXReiRfDuSRID+F84o7EqM 5GkT+uucxvV2rz4FBExhytuyf9lgIYJXgbwBziHtX48w28ipFhRwUIAH2vJT058YWk1+ zG/+wh6kAbLciMC83igLnEpPCLQltMKZ+s7D5gXRHX8MIKKbRORbDcIWQSgCidq4Jm9C oSBJdtV4vNawx4Y8lv0HXdiRNyI1eRiBds1YGkOHsnmQ3hDtWanSBjX1Zwgqjs5t4Tpj e69A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=bkw17dICZlyzCbYHiq9dIhnaZq1I0yg/GLFlXICHkHs=; b=QWLWC78ZJNm3DDou1d3c8MX90DfMvl6ep82sC1QRfgMApLLFY/pNMXw8y/FNuAuUPJ 9kK0wX/l66UJkMOtplihMPM2Cr5ABxDwmih6LYnnahagGQBgWdCzhOuGUNwd/UVzO48W wEnedk5wUSsav79yq2cQKnmy9W2TkwcKEpyMgUZqm0TjlKY/X9dy5GuTcsUvSqfK5pRo tR6Y6STjPVxoB/AEyaq0KMKLr+pouDFTMdBOYjjv5EwFS3lr3ys+ef54/hwLcDxEKIgz FlyIAJ9tBh2v9RK0Ez5lbBVjbkSO3rjeuRF+cKLNbcYL6Vf4qAJux9funtdbf5AOxOGo ZA7Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FVJ8MLu4kUw+jZ0N9TP+mb/EFJ5B3CO8Tbz6uQsvYdAzD4e54ajGRnMTWDdvuTHcvdeWvGuwQLFcevPqw==
X-Received: by 10.112.169.105 with SMTP id ad9mr1188697lbc.135.1461067371695; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 05:02:51 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.213.19 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 05:02:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [71.233.41.235]
In-Reply-To: <CAD499eLvW0KFToSHLb4faMHk2c5ad+HAPEwumaq48QaUbh2n2A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <57151C55.30206@gmail.com> <746128222.2295531.1461009032633.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <CAD499eLvW0KFToSHLb4faMHk2c5ad+HAPEwumaq48QaUbh2n2A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:02:12 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1kFgReUFy-RC9ovMUN9LqnBVRCconku4gyqow0sN_0Y9g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] Interim step on meetings site feedback for sites currently under active consideration
To: Corinne Cath <corinnecath@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c38c08aee1580530d5410f"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/mY74pia1MJ0_6TUbfhbOfgWUgpw>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "mtgvenue@ietf.org" <mtgvenue@ietf.org>, Juliao Braga <juliao@braga.net.br>, "Carlos M. Martinez" <carlos@lacnic.net>, Christian O'Flaherty <oflaherty@isoc.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:03:10 -0000

The IETF has a very strong tradition of commenting at length on the topic
at hand and hoping either that IETF leadership will spend the time to
review the whole thread and extract the salient points from it, or give up
in despair.   So what you are seeing here is very much the IETF tradition.
  Asking people to do better probably won't work, although it never hurts
to try.

I personally see this as a tools problem, more than a communications
problem--we need better tools to track the points being made in discussions
so that either the people discussing can see that they don't need to make a
particular point again, or at least that the people tracking the discussion
can see that the point has already been made.

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:48 AM, Corinne Cath <corinnecath@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Just a quick question: are you intending on providing feedback to the
> IAOC? If so, maybe it makes sense to coordinate a bit in order to prevent a
> duplication of entries? Or will it be useful if multiple people point out
> the same themes?
>
> Best,
>
> Corinne
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 8:50 PM, <nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> >>But
>> >> I think these issues should be balanced with the overall benefit
>> >> that the IETF World Tour provides.
>>
>>
>> >As I've said repeatedly, I don't think the world tour actually
>> >does bring much benefit.  I'm very hopeful that some of the
>> >South Americans who attended their first IETF meeting because
>> >it was held in Buenos Aires will continue to participate (as in:
>> >bring in work and participate in ongoing work, and not as in: sit
>> >in meetings) but historically that has not been the case.
>>
>> Just to put some numbers into this conversation, we have 8 people from
>> Latin America who have signed up to be a part of the Internet Draft Review
>> teams.   The first review team to form will likely be the Spanish-speaking
>> DNSOP review team.
>>
>> This is one week after IETF 95 and after 3 days of soliciting review
>> teams and basically zero publicity.
>>
>> I wonder if there has not been more participation in active IETF work
>> before from other regions because there was no structured way to start
>> participating and language insensitivity.  (BTW, there is a new member of
>> the Mentoring Team from Latin America, that I met in Buenos Aires who will
>> translate the Mentoring emails into Spanish.)
>>
>> But the effort of the Mentoring Team is standing on the shoulders of
>> giants.  People such as Carlos Martinez, Christian O'Flaherty, Alvaro
>> Retana, Dr. Juliao Braga, and many others who have done such a tremendous
>> job of outreach to their community in Latin America.
>>
>> So, let's do some changing of history.
>>
>> Nalini
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mtgvenue mailing list
>> Mtgvenue@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mtgvenue mailing list
> Mtgvenue@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue
>
>