On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 05:16:59PM +0100, Anthony G. Atkielski wrote: > Brian E Carpenter writes: > > > Exactly. If a WG group is discussing a dozen separate issues in parallel, > > an active participant can easily send several dozen *constructive* > > messages in a day. Our problem with disruptive messages can't be solved > > by counting bytes. > > Set a rolling monthly quota, then. Nobody constantly sends a long > stream of consistently productive messages. Anthony, As a gentle suggestion from one of the Sargeant-At-Arms. If you were to keep track of how many messages you have been posting compared to others, I think you would find that you are one of the more prolific posters on this thread. And if you were to stop, take a breath, and post a single message comprising your thoughts on all of the messages that you have been reading, and were to self-impose your own quota on the number of messages you have posted, it would very likely make the IETF list a more pleasant place to converse. This is a discpline that I would recommend to all who are posting to the IETF list... .but given that you are one of the more prolific as of late and you seem to have suggested the quota idea without any idea of the potential irony of that statement, I would like to commend to you your own suggestion. As others have suggested, if you were take as your model the posting frequency and the thoughtfulness of John Klensin's posts, it would be hard for you to go wrong. Regards, - Ted _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf