Re: Last Call: <draft-secretaries-good-practices-06.txt> (IETF Working Groups' Secretaries) to Best Current Practice

Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com> Wed, 03 December 2014 14:53 UTC

Return-Path: <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 384EF1A1B05 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Dec 2014 06:53:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 yJ72JH8Y1rHd for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Dec 2014 06:53:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pd0-x22f.google.com (mail-pd0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 847F71A1B6E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Dec 2014 06:52:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pd0-f175.google.com with SMTP id y10so15518169pdj.6 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 03 Dec 2014 06:52:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+8Z/gAq1QiwZeFyKTGZjEgOy69WGrHqO38SFroqtnVU=; b=s9bezq6G15mnqlNJpAv4jaoauXDy9bwJQt/8v6whH7GM/ViFrB9g1Z+1/hpC085LFu lp2gjBVF37CSVTUkzXSp/m+DFh82O67E6ZtuYiOi/pwvuJX5NuUC3bmiJviB7U9ob2BV 3wfgPP7ICmCyUD6p6FhFAn9/2pxsRq0HxwMbRgQbILhAKcg2ZaEeoQLeuF3nC9lWbcHd qZkqjQav2xxG/hlKb0r/X574MrUDgeps15DM91eLmrSomuYfeW9kNwaz0Q6WmggZlEvy onwzBXujgWsYpTOWxo/KIA6IbN5iN4pGrhANUdD5r8XTNGiU+MxqrgkpBIpPYzX9Z7u8 3Bxg==
X-Received: by 10.66.154.10 with SMTP id vk10mr9410108pab.26.1417618351779; Wed, 03 Dec 2014 06:52:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from spandex.local (63-140-90-29.dynamic.dsl.acsalaska.net. [63.140.90.29]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id lm3sm23480250pab.34.2014.12.03.06.52.30 for <ietf@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 03 Dec 2014 06:52:31 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <547F23AD.90206@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2014 05:52:29 -0900
From: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-secretaries-good-practices-06.txt> (IETF Working Groups' Secretaries) to Best Current Practice
References: <20140612132656.8100.57197.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAL0qLwZEo-AN4Er0gmbCyWJwTqOKBUKKMHEMQ_YqhK+oB+pcgg@mail.gmail.com> <547E9DBA.9040703@pi.nu> <0c1001d00ee9$36598670$a30c9350$@olddog.co.uk> <D51141636F7AC8CBFE11FA93@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <D51141636F7AC8CBFE11FA93@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/njTZPrAUDnquOLGrXcly2oQ2Zps
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 03 Dec 2014 14:53:36 -0000

On 12/3/14 5:40 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
> This document is not ready for prime time in its current form.
> It is part of a style of doing things by making more rules or
> apparent rules that is actually hazardous to the further of the
> IETF as anything but a traditional SDO that approves things on
> the basis of procedure-conformance rather than thinking.  If
> approved for publication at all, it should be approved only
> after revision to make it very clear it is about suggestions
> that might be applicable to some situations, with those
> situations at WG Chair discretion.

I'd like to echo what John said.  I'm somewhat concerned that
the growth of the wg secretary role has something to do with
an inability (or unwillingness) to deal directly with poor chair
performance.  Individual chairs may prefer to have the
assistance but I am truly sorry to see this becoming typical
working group practice.  "All problems can be solved by introducing
a layer of indirection" may be a slightly entertaining joke
about programming practice but it seems a woeful approach to
organizational problems.

Melinda