I have been following "the thread" and I think read most of the messages. I have also followed many other discussions (DOH related for example, or the ISOC one related to PIR) which have been what I would call "poisonous" for the IETF. With my previous experience on IAB, IESG, ISOC BoT, ICANN/SSAC and otherwise active in the leadership for maybe far too many years, I have the following observations on specifically IETF and the IETF@xxxxxxxx mailing list. - As Brian wrote, we do no longer have script running Thomas Narten originally wrote that summaries weekly how many messages, and what size of those messages have been. That summary I (still) think it would makes people react a bit on postings. We should get this running, and data from it possibly used (in)formally in the SAA related activities. - People write too many messages, and in haste. Part from making threads explode and disables people that actually do have other $dayjob to participate. We have to remember ourselves that an inclusive policy, the one we believe we have, should not require people to repeat their point over and over again. We should encourage ourselves and each other to decrease the number of postings. - When discussing protocols we historically (I claim) tried to include all participants needs so that whatever was developed could be used by everyone. The amount of "you are wrong" has increased and to the level (and wording used) that I can not remember seeing 20 years ago. There might be conflicting requirements, sure, but that was dealt with in the evaluation phase. We must listen more. We should to a much higher grade accept other peoples needs. - Be conservative in what you send, liberal in what you receive. Also on our mailing lists. Patrik
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
