On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 12:36 PM Dave Cridland <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 at 16:24, Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On 4/19/21 11:16 AM, Leif Johansson wrote:
>> That way, they can learn to snarl like the rest of us :)
>>
>> Keith
> Or we assign tasks to old-timers so they can learn not to.
In other words, they can spend all of their time politely explaining in
detail why proposals are Bad Ideas, instead of getting useful work done.
Radical thought: What if explaining in detail why a proposal is a Bad Idea *is* useful work?What if it might bring new people in to provide new insight? That strikes me as very useful work indeed.
That depends on the feedback and if it is actually feedback. I almost invariably give too much explanation. And the fact something failed 20 years ago isn't always dispositive, but it is important context.
What I noticed some people do is to tell people something is bad without making any further argument or they will claim certain authorities have written that something is just a terrible idea. When someone tries that on me, I invariably contact said authority for their opinion, unless of course I discussed the issue with them directly before making the proposal.
Thing is, it's not just newcomers who have difficulty with the way IETF carries on.
