At 15:58 07-06-2013, John C Klensin wrote:
And it is getting to that conclusion from the above that often
troubles me about the posting summary list rankings. Assuming a
significant issues shows up on the list, whether in conjunction
with a Last Call or something else. Posting a comment and then
following up the comments of others with a couple of more
postings constitutes three messages in a week, which is pretty
reasonable. On the other hand, if there are four such issues in
a single week (it happens) then that same individual gets
"credited" with a dozen messages, which would make the top of
the list in many weeks.
I'll reuse some text from IETF 55:
- Decisions are taken by backroom deals, intimidation and
mob psychology
- People unsubscribe in disgust in droves
Many years ago the following criticism was made against another body:
"The process is stacked in favour of multinationals with expense accounts
who can afford to talk on the phone for two hours a week and jet to world
capitals for meetings."
The IESG once said that it prefers that comments on Last Calls be
sent to the ietf@xxxxxxxx list. The IESG also said that authors,
working group Chairs and the responsible Area Director are presumed
to see all such messages.
Is posting the summary list ranking a form of intimidation? I don't
know. If ietf@xxxxxxxx is a failure as significant issues are not
showing up on the list (see quoted text above) or if the IESG prefers
that comments on Last Calls be sent to some other list it can say
that. If people unsubscribing in droves is a problem, the IESG could
recommend having two hour phone calls a week and meetings in world
capitals for Last Calls. If the IESG believes that it is more
practical to take decisions through backroom deals it can use a
non-public list for handling Last Calls.
If a significant number of people cannot act or conduct themselves in
a proper way, especially toward others, it is a social problem. If
people cannot filter the ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing list, it is a
technical problem. The IETF has published a specification which
describes a language for filtering email messages at time of final
delivery. After reading the latest messages to the list I might conclude that:
(i) people do not know about the mail filtering language
(ii) people are having technical difficulties using email
(iii) it might rain tomorrow
As an off-topic comment, there are are alternative ways in making a
decision; the best judgement of the most experienced or IETF Consensus.
Regards,
-sm