Hi,
I think this is a good idea to try. It's obviously not an experiment, because there is no control (as John Klensin pointed out). I also don't think one can usefully perform an experiment when effects of a treatment influence a global social graph, so I think the proposal is reasonable.
The core issue is whether people are using the "two purposes" described in the list description to increase their audience, while the recipients might have trouble distinguishing between technical traffic and "direction, policy, and procedures":
"The IETF discussion list serves two purposes. It furthers the development and specification of Internet technology through discussion of technical issues, and it hosts discussions of IETF direction, policy, and procedures. As this is the most general IETF mailing list, considerable latitude is allowed with respect to topics discussed."[0]
It seems obvious to me that people are exploiting the dual attention of the audience here, but reasonable people can disagree.
This idea also heads off bad behavior in a way that seems under-appreciated: currently, people can derail a technical discussion with a procedural issue, and remain on-topic for the list.
Ship it.
thanks,
Rob
