IETF Logo Mail Archive

f2f and mailing list participation - a question for "newer" participants (Was: Re: Interim step on meetings site feedback for sites currently under active consideration)

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Tue, 19 April 2016 19:08 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF86B12E4B8 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:08:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.297
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.297 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4n72D11U1phz for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6298A12E4B9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29416BE54; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:08:08 +0100 (IST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id waN5RjvvZASO; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:08:06 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [10.87.49.100] (unknown [86.46.28.69]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 147CEBE49; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:08:06 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1461092886; bh=4ZofM/6yXxYemYcK8v1ATY4CG2I3kN5hcDFBRv00VLo=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=FC174FZTCmmU0zw1IrFRUTodnJVwa7nN+KA8u7Hn2teCmVpyt54Fdjrsx4A8G7LrJ uZZ+WWQqwI/4A2LUnNtpMdsDSvNziZ4bWOD2s+Wdwbd7xaLQyM+jXmZ4JQWi0pHDfT 1NwSJpOsK4DQmWGgAtQfqJCRUxnCHNS1XyWT7qUc=
Subject: f2f and mailing list participation - a question for "newer" participants (Was: Re: Interim step on meetings site feedback for sites currently under active consideration)
To: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>, ietf@ietf.org
References: <CAPt1N1n+676sAWFLee3oUGUgnTNHh95yFgrsmyjB5VbSmF-=XQ@mail.gmail.com> <876171588.2793946.1461088986149.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <57167C6C.50104@gmail.com>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <57168215.4080107@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 20:08:05 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <57167C6C.50104@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="------------ms020509040800030600060608"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/TkGNfLZ80xFN25LUuFRfGfs6UwY>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 19:08:11 -0000

(The topic seems to have wandered enough to warrant a change of
subject, and apologies for extending what has become a frequently
replayed thread but I've a question at the end aimed at some folks
who maybe don't post here so much...)

On 19/04/16 19:43, Melinda Shore wrote:
> 
> 
> At any rate, inability to travel to Berlin should not in
> any way be seen as a barrier to participation.

I don't think we ought pretend that mailing list participation
isn't inevitably enhanced via in-person connections.

Yes, we can participate via mailing lists. And we need to do
better in encouraging folks to do that. And we need to do that
over and over so that newer and older participants really get it.

But having been to a few f2f meetings IMO really does make
it far easier to get stuff done via mailing lists and otherwise,
e.g. on jabber or audio calls. I further figure that's not
down to how the IETF works, but is because we're talking about
humans.

So I can fully understand how folks who've not (yet:-) been
participating for that long would find attending a f2f meeting
makes a HUGE difference to them.

I can also see how the same sets of folks might have different
views on our current remote access setup - when I had to be
remote for a meeting (Hawaii) I really found it much better than
I had expected, really only the TZ was a killer. But, and it's
a big BUT, I recognised loads of voices in audio and could
IM people in the room to ask stuff, so I suspect the experience
is nowhere near as satisfactory for newer participants.

So, I'd be really interested in hearing from people who've
been participating a bit for a while and who'd consider themselves
as "newer participants" (define that yourself however you want)...

If you've been to a f2f meeting what difference did that make
to how you participate via mailing lists and remote tools?

or

If you've not been to a f2f meeting, what's your experience of
participation via mailing lists and (especially) remote tools?

Cheers,
S.

PS: If folks prefer to answer offlist feel free to do that and
I'll summarise back to the list with whatever level of nymity
you say you want.

PPS: This isn't meant to be scientific nor a good survey, I'm
just interested:-) If there's some or no reaction that might
help with some proper survey stuff in future.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email