IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Support (as co-author)

"Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Mon, 25 November 2019 18:55 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
X-Original-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DACB1120908 for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 10:55:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.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 oco7WK7okpbR for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 10:55:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.154]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 405C3120C30 for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 10:54:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47MGRv18D3zFqhm; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 10:54:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1574708091; bh=OJTskQ+XliKZSCLP/jECLwQ0jpyUcuaegt0rgqpcnVc=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=lkDZmvR4XMm3WRL/0NPuJg3GIMIodt29SDmKLm0UaDFtXLGuWOZgN2CdKWGfemw0a p3RSEGduGLEwIghrlHSFgBp2JPQS3mv3Ml5ZVc0hBGLg7GkZS5uBjJ3AUnBjxZJSmP 8u/wl0lRHPqqG99sKqGv9l1cGexyymw8+nubWT10=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net
Received: from [192.168.128.43] (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net [209.255.163.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 47MGRt1Ms1zrY7B; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 10:54:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Support (as co-author)
To: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>, WG Chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>
References: <5871efb6-9fa7-a06a-e201-fb9fba04935e@cisco.com> <BN7PR05MB56994BEAB83D4D5475E37F44AE4A0@BN7PR05MB5699.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Message-ID: <71c1796d-1a17-824f-f555-56c3637bd86e@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 13:54:46 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BN7PR05MB56994BEAB83D4D5475E37F44AE4A0@BN7PR05MB5699.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/PqnF_2gc6ed3xCUxsJl4JOgbnqQ>
X-BeenThere: wgchairs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wgchairs/>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 18:55:21 -0000

I normally make clear to the authors as part of agreeinf to issue a call 
(adoption or WG last call) that I am looking for non-authorial support.
Nonetheless, the authors almost always respond with their support.  So I 
don't count that.

I have occaisonally tried to decide what I should do about drafts that 
have a large number of "authors".  I have not had to deal with it much. 
Most days, when I consider it, I conclude that my ignoring the "authors" 
is a fair trade for them playing games listing them.
It would be harder in the cases I have heard about in some other WGs 
where the work really is a collaboration among a large number of people. 
  At that point, I suspect the calls become more a call for objections / 
concerns.

Yours,
Joel

On 11/25/2019 1:03 PM, Ron Bonica wrote:
> +1
> 
> 
> Juniper Business Use Only
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WGChairs <wgchairs-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Benoit Claise
> Sent: Monday, November 25, 2019 10:10 AM
> To: WG Chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>
> Subject: Support (as co-author)
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> Along the years, I witnessed a trend, which intensifies with time: "I support the adoption of this draft (as a co-author)."
> Well, if someone is a co-author, implicitly this person wants the draft to progress. Therefore, such as message carries no weight IMO.
> Is it time for the WG chairs to start correcting this behaviour, or at least setting the right expectations?
> 
> ex:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/?q=Adoption*20Call*20for*20draft-ioamteam-ippm-ioam-direct-export__;JSUl!8WoA6RjC81c!QBeN6lMyv7px6hR_Xv2f4ZKZFt7oA4txb8fooEa8mK84cDKE3RQtdcDjWzGzOz1S$
> 
> Regards, Benoit
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email