Re: The Friday Report (was Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf@xxxxxxxx)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

I don't care if this report is published or not, but I will point
out that the 1 week sample period is not that useful if
the intent is to spot excessive posting.

Somebody could be following up on 1 thread, and not post again
for a year.  Somebody could be participating in an IETF Last Call
discussion, which should not even count as "extra" since that is
a critical part of our review process.


Andy


On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 12:12 AM, Heasley <heas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Am Aug 3, 2013 um 9:05 schrieb Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@xxxxxxxxx>:
>
>> On 8/3/13, Patrik Fältström <paf@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On 3 aug 2013, at 08:46, Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I prefer if you post at end of Friday (as in the end of working days of 5 in each week).
>>
>>>> However, in my comment below I
>>>> will follow the week as done in world calender, start from Sunday
>>>> (mornings) and ends on Saturday (nights).
>>>
>>> The day a week starts, and what days are working days in a week, differs
>>> between cultures. Many have Sunday-Thursday as working days. Many have
>>> Monday as the first day of the week.
>>
>> I suggested to Thomas to submit report in end of Friday (read what i
>
> I suggest eliminating the report. As it doesn't measure content quality, one's contribution can't be measured by the email they produce. So, it is only a guage of  the distraction they produce. The report itself is a distraction.





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]