Hi -
> From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
...
> But who pays the operators' bills, and do we need to encourage participation at
> that level as well?
Participation as:
RFC uptake:
- using something based on an RFC?
- deploying something based on an RFC?
- implementing something based on an RFC?
- providing useful feedback based on usage/deployment/implementation experience?
I-D uptake:
- providing I-D reviews?
- implementation of something based on an I-D?
- providing useful feedback based on usage/deployment/implementation experience?
WG participation:
- lurking on mailing list(s)?
- useful contribution to email conversation?
- participation in meetings?
- volunteering as scribe?
- volunteer as editor?
- design team work?
- mentoring newcomers?
...
For each of the possible target populations, what would be the realistic motivations
to do one or more of these? I think factors to consider would include:
- tradeoff between time investment required and hoped-for outcome
- perceived likelihood that one's participation would make a difference
- perceived extent to which this time investment or contribution (not the
same thing!) would be favorably recognized by:
+ one's peers
+ one's employer
+ potential future employers
+ one's customers / clients
- whether there would be any personal satisfaction derived from participation
- others?
Thinking about the cross-product of these lists and the target populations that have
been mentioned, it seems a minor miracle that the IETF has had been able to get
as much participation and diversity as it has. Particularly when we get to the "user"
level, the time investment / payoff ratio seems all wrong unless that user is highly
altruistic or has a generous sponsor with "big picture" motivations.
It also seems that for specific target populations, it might be useful to identify (1) the
specific ways in which that population might have the most positive impact on
the IETF and more importantly (2) identify the ways in which IETF participation
might have the biggest positive impact on those types participants, their employers,
or other constituencies with whom they identify. Not quite a marketing strategy, but until
this conversation is centered around learning the needs, gifts, and motivations
of these "other" people, it's not going to accomplish much to increase participation.
Randy