IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@ietf.org

Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> Fri, 07 June 2013 14:49 UTC

Return-Path: <narten@us.ibm.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 6C45821F9050 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 07:49:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n2MlJGFsugWq for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 07:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from e9.ny.us.ibm.com (e9.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.139]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 820C521F93F8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 07:49:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from /spool/local by e9.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for <ietf@ietf.org> from <narten@us.ibm.com>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 10:49:29 -0400
Received: from d01dlp02.pok.ibm.com (9.56.250.167) by e9.ny.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.109) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 10:49:28 -0400
Received: from d01relay01.pok.ibm.com (d01relay01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.233]) by d01dlp02.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ECF36E803A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 10:49:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (d01av04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.64]) by d01relay01.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id r57EnRID310920 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 10:49:27 -0400
Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id r57EnRtv024980 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 10:49:27 -0400
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (sig-9-65-142-41.mts.ibm.com [9.65.142.41]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id r57EnP8p024776 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 10:49:26 -0400
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.12.5) with ESMTP id r57EnN5N008971 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 10:49:23 -0400
Message-Id: <201306071449.r57EnN5N008971@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
To: "<ietf@ietf.org>" <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@ietf.org
In-reply-to: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751CA462@mbx-01.win.nominum.com>
References: <201306070453.r574r3Wt010088@rotala.raleigh.ibm.com> <CADnDZ89FjyPtvJQSqY+kmX+1KYkc0jo1mRpOgkfcEnTH6Vbg6A@mail.gmail.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751CA462@mbx-01.win.nominum.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> message dated "Fri, 07 Jun 2013 14:39:54 -0000."
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 10:49:23 -0400
From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
X-TM-AS-MML: No
X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER
x-cbid: 13060714-7182-0000-0000-00000732538F
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 14:49:38 -0000

What the weekly stats really ought to tally up is the readers/postings
ratio, so that folk would get more direct feedback as to whether what they are
posting is actually being read...

My strong suspicion would be that there is strong negative correlation
between frequency of posts and actual readers of those posts...

Also, I suspect that many people do not realize that a significant
chunk of IETF contributers are no longer subscribed to the ietf list
due to signal to noise ratio concerns...

Thomas

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status