On 4/15/21 5:22 PM, Wes Hardaker wrote:
Michael Thomas <mike@xxxxxxxx> writes:
Maybe one thing that could be done is to have a set of things that
newbies can do to participate that are likely to be taken very
favorably. What author doesn't like somebody who's gone through your
ID with a fine tooth comb for nits, bad grammar, unclear text, etc and
especially from fresh eyes from the perspective of a potential
implementer, for example. Everybody would win in that situation. Their
naivety is a huge benefit.
As a guide(s) I've (we've) mentioned this specific helpful task to
newcomers. However, reviewing documents is sort of "boring" task to
many I'm sure. What I've (we've?) failed to do is also state "and by
doing this your name will be put in the acknowledgements section", which
honestly might help motivate some. Maybe.
I'd like to point out that it is not always true. I had some reviews over the years that were not acknowledged in the final version of the RFC and I must say that spending hours on a substantial review without the only reward you could ever get for it is not a great feeling, especially as a newcomer. Let's just say that the authors of these RFCs are not going out of my do-not-review list anytime soon.
--
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Email: marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Blog: https://marc.petit-huguenin.org
Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug
