From: ietf <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> on behalf of Toerless Eckert <tte@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 22 October 2023 23:53
a) I find it most curious that this mail thread has not generated a response like
"please unsubscribe me from this list".
This definitely is a big difference over the IETF mailing list from the past.
And unfortunately not a good one, because people have not become more cluefull about email.
b) I do not think that the insufficiencies of specific MUAs with IMAP should be reasons to
change what happens on the list, but this seems to be the reason for
Paul starting this thread. Btw.: i too now read this list via IMAP, and it sucks.
I wish my IMAP MUA was better, no technical reason not to support filterinf for example.
c) I like the bot as a quaint historical artefact. A URL at the bottom of each of its email
pointing to some explanation would be useful for newcomers to understand its (historic)
purpose.
<tp>
Please no. URL are just a another chance for webmail to breach my privacy and put junk on my PC.
Tom Petch
d) I suggest for creating a new "Machine Intelligence" IETF area. The bot should then
become part of the charter of a WG for "AI in messaging" to further tackle the subject.
We should also have a separate cross-technology WG in the area about
"Protocol considerations for Human responsibilty in AI" and a WG for
"Measuring the impact of AI on society - and vice versa".
Cheers
Toerless
P.S.: Sorry, classical escapism with IETF118 deadline drawing closer.
On Sun, Oct 15, 2023 at 01:35:27PM -0400, John R Levine wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Oct 2023, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> > > I read the list once in a while using a threaded mail client and half the screen is counting the other half of the screen.
> > Ah. So you are counting threads, not messages.
> > Maybe we can ask JohnL to format the messages so they all appear in one thread on your user agent? Would make the bot output slightly more useful for me, too. (Yes, it is useful, not only for self-supervision.)
>
> Every message count message has a subject line starting
>
> Messages from the ietf list for the week ending
>
> That should be easy enough to filter on, but if adding References and
> In-Reply-To headers to thread them would deter some kvetching, sure.
>
> As to why I send out the messages, I see that several people have already
> answered the question on my behalf, and nobody's asked me, so who am I to
> disagree?
>
> R's,
> John
>
--
---
tte@xxxxxxxxx
