[Responding on thread, but not specifically to Tim] While it is good to be sensitive to newcomers, may I suggest that we should treat everyone the same, and that is nicely! The theory seems to be that "It is OK to be harsh, abrupt, or shouty with established participants when they do something we don't like, but if they are a newcomer we should be gentle." Well, no! We should be civil and polite to everyone, and we should not need to behave differently to one subset. Sure, if someone presses a hot button, we should say "Whoa, that is a big red flag in the IETF." And we should offer to explain why, offline, and in private. But why would we not do that to an established participant? If we are nice by default, we don't need to worry about how to be nice in special cases. Better still, we don't have to work out how to distinguish categories of participants. Just be professional and nice. Thanks, Adrian -----Original Message----- From: ietf <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Tim Chown Sent: 26 March 2019 16:22 To: Salz, Rich <rsalz@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx; Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: cultural sensitivity towards new comers (was Re: voting rights in general) > On 26 Mar 2019, at 15:42, Salz, Rich <rsalz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> New participants could also stand to get some training. > > We offer newcomer's training on Sunday, and the same presentation a couple of times the weeks before the IETF. Are there other things we could do? See https://www.ietf.org/how/meetings/104/newcomers/ and https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/slides-104-edu-sesse-newc omers-overview-for-ietf-104-00 Do we include a map showing where all the historic IETF minefields are? "So we should add a DHCPv6 default gateway option!" "We can just insert an extra header here rather than encapsulating!" etc. I suspect if newcomers step on one of those unwittingly they may get a harsher response than usual. I wonder what the 10 biggest mines are....? Tim
