On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 8:26 PM John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]
Even our announcements of new non-WG lists are part of the
problem. As a handy example, an announcement appeared today
titled "New Non-WG Mailing List: cfbl". It tells the reader
where the archives are and how to subscribe. It tells us that
it is "intended for discussions relating to the Complaint
Feedback Loop Address Header", but one needs to be rather
thoroughly immersed in that corner of the ART area (the
announcement does say it belongs to that area) to have a clue
about what that is about. Either you or I could probably could
figure out where to look but a newcomer, especially one who did
not know enough to treat "This list belongs IETF area" (sic) as
a clue, I think it would be pretty hopeless. It does tell
anyone who wants additional information to "please contact the
list administrators". That, unfortunately, just makes things
worse: No information in the announcement as to who those people
might be or how to contact/ reach them, etc. Someone very
experienced with the IETF might notice that someone named
"jpb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" is copied on the announcement and is not
the list address itself, but that is not a person's name, it is
just a hint, it is easily missed, and expecting a newcomer to
make that inference is, well, unrealistic. One might reasonably
try to go to the list's "info" page (disguised in the
announcement as "To subscribe:") for information about how to
contact the list administrators, but that page is very similar
to the 14all list. In particular, the terms "list
administrator" or even "administrator" do not even appear on it.
Once upon a time, we required anyone requesting that the IETF
create or host a list provide a paragraph of description of what
that list was about, who was expected to participate, and why.
Apparently that is no longer the case. If we care about
openness and transparency, probably not a step in the right
direction.
Speaking for myself and not the IESG:
I was the Area Director that approved this list, so I can clarify what happened here.
The non-WG list request form includes two fields pertinent to this case. One of them requests a one-liner to be included on the non-WG "list-of-lists" page. It appears that the text that was submitted for this purpose was replaced with simply "cfbl-address-header", which I agree is not very descriptive. I just asked the list manager to update that page with the one-liner I was given.
The second field asks for a more detailed description, and indicates where this will be used, in particular in the announcement that's sent to the community. The text provided for that field in the form I was sent was terse, to the point of being unhelpful as John pointed out, and it's my fault for not catching this and considering where it would be visible. So, apologies for that oversight, and I'll be more cautious about it in the future. I've asked for something more comprehensive in the way of a descriptive paragraph. In terms of fixing this, however, there doesn't seem to be a place where such prose is used outside of the announcement, which has already been sent, so I'm not sure what to do with it once I have it in hand. It doesn't appear to be present on the non-WG lists page or on the WG's mailman status page, etc.
Perhaps I can get the announcement re-sent.
At a minimum, I'll send it to the ART area list.
As for whether non-WG lists are any different than WG lists in terms of management and responsibility, I don't have any reason to think they warrant any different treatment. The list administrators should be aware that they have obligations to manage the list as a WG list would be managed, that the Note Well applies, and what the remedy procedures are when problems arise. I'm generally supportive of the idea of making all of this more evident in list footers or list management pages where people might land. Finally, in the absence of effective management of a list where problems are happening, I believe suspension or closure of the list might be warranted until such management can be secured.
-MSK
