Subject: Re: [Diversity] civility in wg interactions

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2014 17:30:58 +0200

On Monday, July 28, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote:

>
> There was a letter written in March 2013.  There has been an IETF
> statement related to behavior.  A draft, intended as a BCP, has been
> discussed.  Have there been any results since then?  I don't really know.

I don't know as well. The problem is that general area is weak and is not
functioning well. How can we track those work related to general area while
general area has no dispatch WG or at least one WG? The only able to answer
is IESG or AD responsible. Because authors of such draft could have been
discouraged.

>
> I followed a few sessions remotely.  It was the usual (not bad).  The
> plenary highlighted that there are a lot of people who do not read the ietf@
> mailing list and there is high probability that they do not read this
> mailing list.  These people have the ability to influence the choice of
> IESG members.

If they do influence then IESG is weak, because only the community should
influence IESG and that is done through consensus not through non diversity
considerations.

Some of these people have been in the IETF longer than most of the people
> on this mailing list.  I doubt that education would work.

IMHO, May be because they are not educated. Or they think they are the only
smart people on the earth, such behavior is damaging the IETF future.

> There are advantages and disadvantages for calling out specific behavior.

I don't agree. We don't need non educated people or people that just want
to influence without community decisions and without IETF procedures.

> The advantage is that people do not see a problem unless it is pointed out
> to them.  A disadvantage is that it is bad for one's career.  Will there be
> a loss of expertise if specific behavior is being called out?  Yes.

IMHO No, we will get more real experience in. I some times feel that IETF
has cow boys that are influencing. Do you think we got in the IETF the real
internet experts of the world? I think we take influence out the bad and
influence in the good expert while all are experts ( the ugly may be left
and guided).

> As a formal comment, the IESG is responsible for behavioral matters.

I disagree, because IETF is about community, so we should work together to
fix IESG or fix IETF or fix our work procedure. The IETF general area is
the real responsible body and it is weak and needs work.

AB

---

From: S Moonesamy <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2014 03:31:09 -0700

Hi Abdussalam,
At 08:30 02-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>How can we track those work related to general area while general 
>area has no dispatch WG or at least one WG?

There is an IETF mailing list to comment about general topics ( 
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ).

>Do you think we got in the IETF the real internet experts of the world?

There are some persons in the IETF who have the expertise to review 
some of the technologies used on the internet.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

---

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 13:21:50 +0200

Hello Moonesamy;

On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 12:31 PM, S Moonesamy <[email-masked]> wrote:

>> How can we track those work related to general area while general area
>> has no dispatch WG or at least one WG?
>>
>

That IETF mailing list seems not to be related to the General Area because
the area has no WG so far. IMO The list is a space for all areas including
the general one. The IETF list is not considering diversity and has many
impolite posters.

> There are some persons in the IETF who have the expertise to review some
> of the technologies used on the internet.
>

Yes IETF has some but that reply was against the reply saying that we got
experts that may leave if we comment on their impolite behavior. while I
never seen experts in the world that are not polite. I beleive if there are
some expert that are impolite then it means he or she works alone and if
they work alone then they cannot be experts. The beauty of IETF is that its
experts dont work alone this is the IETF principle of WGs. So IETF becomes
the real expert in the field and better than all experts only if it is more
diversified and does not allow editors/private_groups to work alone. So
real experts dont work alone and have excellent behavior.

AB

---

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 13:13:14 +0100

I think this thread has digressed a long way from the purpose of this list and may be causing unnecessary distraction.
 
Forming a WG in the General Area is no different from forming a WG in any other area. It does not happen by wishing or stating that one should be formed. It happens when a need is demonstrated for a forum to do collective work toward a specific deliverable.
 
To drive that (if you want to) you need to:
- identify the topic you think needs a working group
- write an internet-Draft describing the problem space
- gather a group of people who agree with you
- request a BoF or the immediate formation of a working group
 
Can we please return this list to the intended topic, viz.
 
> The diversity design team will work on identifying diversity related 
> issues that the IETF faces and making practical recommendations that can 
> help in this regard. This mailing list will be used for obtaining input 
> from the community.
 
Thanks,
Adrian
 
From: diversity [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Abdussalam Baryun
Sent: 04 August 2014 12:22
To: S Moonesamy
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Diversity] civility in wg interactions
 
Hello Moonesamy;

At 08:30 02-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
How can we track those work related to general area while general area has no dispatch WG or at least one WG?
 
There is an IETF mailing list to comment about general topics ( https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ). 

That IETF mailing list seems not to be related to the General Area because the area has no WG so far. IMO The list is a space for all areas including the general one. The IETF list is not considering diversity and has many impolite posters.

There are some persons in the IETF who have the expertise to review some of the technologies used on the internet.
 
Yes IETF has some but that reply was against the reply saying that we got experts that may leave if we comment on their impolite behavior. while I never seen experts in the world that are not polite. I beleive if there are some expert that are impolite then it means he or she works alone and if they work alone then they cannot be experts. The beauty of IETF is that its experts dont work alone this is the IETF principle of WGs. So IETF becomes the real expert in the field and better than all experts only if it is more diversified and does not allow editors/private_groups to work alone. So real experts dont work alone and have excellent behavior.
 
AB