RE: Egonomics

["Andrew M. Benhase" <abenhase at gte.net>]

I think that that simplest answer is to have this
list moderated by an IETF official. What could be
an easier answer than that?

Andrew M. Benhase
Email:  abenhase at gte.net


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vernon Schryver
> [mailto:vjs at calcite.rhyolite.com]
> Sent: Sunday, July 19, 1998 2:44 PM
> To: ietf at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Egonomics
>
>
> > From: bill at zeus.geo.net
>
> >To Fred:  I'd hate to see anyone
> banned from the list.  But, I also hate having
> > my mailbox full of non-mail
> addressing topics of no interest on this planet.
> > Maybe the time has come for a
> moderator.  (No, I'm not volunteering.)
>
> How about making the reflector at
> ietf at ietf.org do some rate limiting?
> Limiting everyone to a running average
> of about ~6 messages/month?
> Or why not try RED?  Randomly drop
> messages from everyone and anyone with a
> probability that varies with the number
> of messages seen by the reflector
> in the last 4 days?
> Either idea would comparatively silence
> the worst offenders, and would
> be "fair."  Neither would require
> continuing effort by the IAB or IESG.
> (Maybe exempt counting the drafts announcments.)
>
>
> >Enough is enough.  Maybe attendance at
> one IETF meeting should be a requirement
> > to participate in the various IETF lists?
>
> Why?  To maximize the voices of
> standard issue Standards Committee Go-ers?
> I trust you've noticed that the IETF
> has not been immune from that syndrome
> for several years.  Besides, if you
> read some of the messages from the
> kooks, you'll see that at least some of
> them attend or at least threaten
> to attend.
>
>
> Vernon Schryver    vjs at rhyolite.com
>