(removing the separate copy to the IESG -- ADs who are interested can presumably follow this thread) --On Thursday, 14 March, 2013 07:23 -0500 Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 10:23 PM, John C Klensin > <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote: >... >> (1) I've found the Newcomer's Meet-and-Greet very useful in >> finding newcomers I want to keep and eye on and try to help >> move along and my personal instincts are to go for diversity >> in those decisions. But those sessions are open only to WG >> Chairs and IAB and IESG members --people who tend to be among >> the more overextended in terms of schedules-- in addition to >... > [MB] What I find interesting is that there was 200+ > newcomers, but I certainly didn't find that many at the meet > and greet. I have to wonder whether this doesn't have to do > with the overlap between Sunday tutorials and this event. I > think that needs to be fixed. Agreed, but see below. > Another comment about the meet > and greet is that I see far more WG chairs chatting with one > another as opposed to newcomers. I think that is at least partially due to its being the first time the WG Chairs and their ADs get to see each other during the week, so it becomes an opportunity to grab each other "for a minute" and synchronize. Rethinking the timing/scheduling would help there too. While it would disrupt enough other things to need careful thought, it might be that we should just throw the newcomers into the main reception and then do a short meet/greet/intro after that. Probably others have better ideas. > While I find that there is > rarely new comers to RAI area, just welcoming these folks is > really important independent of technical area of interest. I > also try to find the WG chairs that are in that area. I > regularly talk to at least 10 newcomers - and do chide some of > you all that are not chatting with newcomers ;) I can't > imagine as a newcomer approaching a group of WG chairs to > introduce myself. The chairs should be actively seeking out > newcomers at these event. Concur. > One question I have is whether there isn't a list for > newcomers to ask questions that some of us can be on to help > them before they get to the meeting? It is incredibly rare > for a newcomer to ask questions on the IETF discussion. I think that a list on which newcomers could introduce themselves a bit as well as asking questions would be helpful. I think doing some mentor-newcomer matching before the meeting (as ISOC does) would be very useful and newcomer introductions and people approaching them would facilitate that, maybe without needing a "process". > Also, it might help to setup a mentoring group and related > mailing list and perhaps a wiki where folks that are willing > to be mentors put their names and areas of focus and > expertise. This could be helpful to both newcomers and folks > that are interested in learning about new areas. [/MB] Qualified "yes". I'm somewhat afraid of setting up more processes that, even if only by the time involved, tends to isolate either newcomers or would-be mentors from other IETF efforts. It might also encourage some IETF participants to say "there is a nice list of people willing to help, and they are all organized, so I don't have to take responsibility". I believe that these efforts will succeed only if almost all of us take responsibility. Even a list on which newcomers can ask questions can be a problem unless we have good ideas about the weaning process. I'm not against a list and wiki, just feeling that we should understand the possible risks and be prepared to deal with them. FWIW, I find that most of my more effective mentoring (measured in terms of later productivity of people in the IETF) has occurred when I spot someone who appears capable and energetic but is off-course and step in with private notes and offers. That may be just a matter of style and certainly discriminates against those who, for whatever reason, don't speak up. For the latter, I find the meet-and-greet helpful, but it has its own problems as you point out. Two other suggestions along the same line: (1) The "smiley faces" are probably a good idea, but, IMO, very badly executed, starting with handing them to the most busy people and having no obvious way for people who are less busy and might be more accessible to get one. We are also getting close to terminal badge-clutter overload -- I can't keep track any longer and would assume the typical newcomer would be in "eyes glazed over" status. Worse, to someone new to the community, those decoration can start to look like admission symbols for various cabals from which they are excluded. If we have to use badge decorations, I'd like to see a reference card that would fit in the badge holder available at registration and the community treating putting anything on a badge that isn't shown on the reference card as a antisocial act. Happy to discuss that offline with anyone responsible. (2) Our "newcomers" model doesn't distinguish likely long-term participants from tourists. I think we should be welcoming to the tourists but, in terms of, e.g., scarce mentoring resources, spending time on them is a bad optimization. In addition "newcomer" is really not a one-shot thing. I don't know how to identify and create a ribbon distinction between "newcomer and possible long-term participant" and "tourist" and it is probably impractical, but a ribbon in a different color for second-time attendees might be helpful. As was said last night, if someone wearing a "newcomer" badge seems to be either lost or isolated, approaching them is usually A Good Thing. And that principle should apply for two or three meetings, not just one. best, john