I would suggest that the IESG is probably putting the cart before the horse. The IETF mailing list is an IETF asset, not an IESG one. Instead, let's have the discussion of what's needed by the IETF first, and then figure out how to accomplish it. While at times the IETF list is unruly and irrelevant, it truly is our open forum, and placing moderators on it will have - my opinion - a chilling affect on open discourse. I see no evidence that the sergeant-at-arms approach is not working and while I might like tweaks to what gets posted to the list, I am mostly willing to endure what noise there is for the occasional nuggets of wisdom, technical thought and weird comments. That said, if the IESG wants to moderate something, feel free to copy the IETF mailing list and republish it as a second moderated list. Let the market decide by subscriptions to one or the other. Mike Sent from my iPad > On Jul 22, 2014, at 10:24, IETF Chair <chair@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The ietf@xxxxxxxx list is very active. It hosts varied discussions ranging from last calls to IETF organisation matters to any Internet technology-related topics that come up. We all have seen how much discussion there is, and occasionally, discussions that become unproductive or repetitive. Part of the root cause of this is that unlike most IETF lists, there is no working group chair overseeing and driving discussions. > > The IESG has discussed this and plans to add moderators to manage the list discussion. The moderators will track and guide discussions and remind people when they get outside of the lines. Please respect the feedback from the moderators when they say, for instance, that an issue has been already previously discussed. > > The moderation system will not affect other mailing list management methods that are used on this list or in the IETF in general. > > If you have feedback on this plan, please let us know. > > Jari Arkko for the IESG >