 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
> We have a way to count DISCUSS positions, but we do not have a way to > figure out what percentage of them are perceived as "late surprises" > by the community. So, while we are taking action in an attempt to > make things better, we do not have a way to measure our success or > failure beyond community perception. Suggestions on making this more > objective and less subjective are greatly appreciated. > > Russ I agree that it might be hard to measure the effect of particular actions (e.g. changes in procedures). However, it is *not* hard to measure overall trends in performance, and to break these trends down between areas and types of documents. My understanding is that the Simcoe dataset continues beyond 2001, and that with some relatively modest effort, a detailed analysis could be produced quantifying how the IETF has performed. This would give us a window into what the actual results have been. |
_______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.