On 6/23/22 11:26, Miles Fidelman wrote:
I was thinking, specifically, of a list admin, or well respected person having a "side chat" with someone. "Private social pressure" if you will. It seems to work pretty well on some neighborhood lists I run - neighbors talking politics - in a Boston suburb known for it's political correctness. I maintain a hands-off moderation policy - we're a public forum, if you don't like something, hit your delete key or call your lawyer - I want neither the headache, nor liabilities associated with active moderation. But... we do have our issues - and one of my co-founders - a former city councilwoman - is known to have private side chats with people when things get out of hand. Seems to work exceptionally well at toning things down.
And in general I agree that private feedback often works better than public feedback, if for no other reason than with private feedback the person getting the feedback doesn't have to consider that many people will see the response.
But it's different in IETF for several reasons. One is that a WG chair (who is the default list admin) really should be ensuring fairness of process, so for them to give even private feedback to an individual participant can look like they're trying to manipulate the result. It's dubious to claim consensus when the chair has actively suppressed certain participants' input, and for them to do so privately also robs the community of transparency.
Keith
