Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?

On Sat, 30 May 2020 at 19:26, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:
>
> HI Mark,
>
> So what is your recommendation ?
>
> What should make an individual eligible by your standards to express an opinion on adoption or last call of any proposal in 6man or any WG?
>

Since this is a group that does work ("working group"), I think it is
fair to expect some evidence of contribution to the work the group
does, such as active involvement in previous working group mailing
list discussions, authored or co-authored Internet Drafts relevant to
the working group's purpose, or mentions in working group relevant ID
acknowledgement sections indicating off-line communication and
contribution with the author(s) regarding the ID.

It doesn't seem fair to me that people who haven't contributed work to
the group get a say in what work the group does or does not do.

Regards,
Mark.

> If someone is following SPRING and 6MAN just by reading list archives and he sees an adoption call - by your standards he can not one time voice his opinion ? Very interesting ...
>
> In fact 6man is open also for non subscribers making it very welcoming to anyone to send an email even without joining the WG list.
>
> Sure - in the past I personally experienced folks from a vendor subscribing and voting with an artificial name yet silly enough to use their company internal mailer domain - pretending he is an operator, but those would be rather ugly exceptions then a rule.
>
> Thx a lot,
> R.
>
>
> On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 4:48 AM Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Do you think somebody who spent many hours of their own time preparing
>> and presenting this at the AusNOG 2015 conference wants to discourage
>> IETF participation, unless it is trying to influence group consensus
>> via membership stacking and using ring-ins (Australian for non-genuine
>> members)?
>>
>> "Why you should read RFCs and Internet Drafts (and what you need to
>> know to do so)"
>> https://www.ausnog.net/sites/default/files/ausnog-2015/presentations/1.4_Mark_Smith_AusNOG2015.pdf
>>
>> On Sat, 30 May 2020 at 01:08, Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > > On May 28, 2020, at 10:25 AM, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Am questioning if we are seeing a growth in participation – or a blatant stacking of the floor with people who have never set foot on the lists and will never will again.
>> > >
>> >
>> > (No hat)
>> >
>> > I’m concerned about how welcoming this might be to new participants who perhaps have a legitimate problem to be solved that they discover in the operations of a network.  This above text doesn’t reflect a welcoming environment, nor one where perhaps someone has something valuable to contribute in a single area of expertise of operations.
>> >
>> > I’m going to bookmark this thread for a reminder next time someone asks me about if the IETF is welcoming to newcomers.
>> >
>> > - Jared
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> ipv6@ietf.org
>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------