Re: The RFC Acknowledgement

[Abdussalam Baryun <[e-mail]>]

Hi Dale,

thanks for your feedback. some comment below,

On 2/10/13, Dale R. Worley <[e-mail]> wrote:
> I believe that you are examining this problem from the point of view
> of a reviewer (and possible contributor) to a document, rather than
> the point of view of a document author.  That is, your question is
> "When can I expect a document author to include an Acknowledgment of
> my review?"

Yes, usually the I-D is always about the author's point of view
ignoring others, but only great authors want people feedback to have
doc communicate with the reader,
>
> In practice, that depends on the judgment the document author; does
> the document author feel that you have made a "significant"
> contribution to the document?

I agree that it is responsibility of owners or authors. In IETF the
I-D may be a WG I-D so the group work together to feel what is best,

>
> In general, even if an outside observer would say that you contributed
> significantly to a document, it can appear impolite to explicitly
> request that your name be added to the Acknowledgments section.

It depends on who is acknowledging (ACK), is it the authors or the WG,
or any....,
In the I-D ACK section, it can mention that IESG acknowledges smith,
the IETF acknowledge the ITU, the authors acknowledge RFC333 authors,
the WG acknowledge Saley, etc.

Also depend on *why* the acknowledge section. Authors don't only ACK
because of significant contributions, that is impolite too. In most
documents in the world authors may thank their son even if he had no
direct contribution but because the authors were working at home (a
volunteering space) they felt to ACK their son, because of his good
influences on work. In IETF it is all about discussions and comments
for its I-Ds and RFCs, new comers' participation make the discussions
valueable in my opinion,

>
>> A participant that still did not complete a year working for IETF, but
>> trying to continue :)
>
> My belief is that one must participate in the IETF fairly intensively
> for six months to a year before one can gain a reputation as being a
> knowledgeable contributor.  After all, most of the people authoring
> documents have been participating for several years -- and they
> already know each other.  Before you have gained that reputation, it
> may be difficult to get people to pay attention to your contributions,
> even if they are objectively valuable.  I describe the rule in the
> IETF as "Everyone may speak; not everyone is listened to."  You need
> to prove yourself to be a person worth listening to.

I agree, but we should n't ignore voices of new participants, and
don't ignore people that are listening and never participate.

>
> Much useful advice on this subject is contained in RFC 4144, "How to
> Gain Prominence and Influence in Standards Organizations".
>

Thanks for that advice,

> My experience is that one can learn how to get more respect in an
> organization by occasionally asking more experienced people how to do
> so.  One method that works in most organizations is to volunteer for
> the "thankless tasks".  In any organization, there are tasks that are
> acknowledged as necessary, they are unpleasant to do, and people who
> do it are not rewarded commensurately for doing them.  (Reviewing
> drafts is one of them in the IETF.)  However, if you develop a
> reputation as a person who does these tasks, it will increase the
> respect you receive.

Your right, however, just to add that I don't participate in IETF to
make reputation, because I think it is not a place for reputation, I
try to participate to volunteer in the Internet Community to add to my
Internet knowledge and others,


thanks alot for all your comments and advice :)

AB