Subject: [Diversity] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-crocker-diversity-conduct-03.txt

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 08:11:51 -0700

G'day.

There's a revision to the draft, based on comments from SM and Narelle.
 Note the diff link, to see the few changes.

d/
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-crocker-diversity-conduct-03.txt
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 07:49:06 -0700
From: [email-masked]
To: Narelle Clark <[email-masked]>, Narelle Clark
<[email-masked]>, Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>, Dave
Crocker <[email-masked]>

A new version of I-D, draft-crocker-diversity-conduct-03.txt
has been successfully submitted by Dave Crocker and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:		draft-crocker-diversity-conduct
Revision:	03
Title:		An IETF with Much Diversity and Professional Conduct
Document date:	2015-04-14
Group:		Individual Submission
Pages:		16
URL:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-crocker-diversity-conduct-03.txt
Status:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-crocker-diversity-conduct/
Htmlized:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-crocker-diversity-conduct-03
Diff:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-crocker-diversity-conduct-03

Abstract:
   The process of producing today's Internet through a culture of open
   participation and diverse collaboration has proved strikingly
   efficient and effective, and it is distinctive among standards
   organizations.  For its early years, participation in the IETF and
   its antecedent was almost entirely composed of well-funded, American,
   white, male engineers, establishing a distinctive and challenging
   group dynamic, both in management and in personal interactions.  In
   the case of the IETF, interaction style can often demonstrate
   singularly aggressive behavior, often including singularly hostile
   tone and content.  Groups with greater diversity make better
   decisions.  Obtaining meaningful diversity requires more than generic
   good will and statements of principle.  Many different behaviors can
   serve to reduce participant diversity or participation diversity.
   This paper discusses IETF participation, in terms of the nature of
   diversity and practical issues that can increase or decrease it.

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

---

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 00:32:59 +0200

I like the draft, and thanks. I am not sure if the author will accept my
comments in future. In my opinion the author did not answer in far past to
my comments so I don't review the revisions. However, your draft needs
diverse reviews as well do WG drafts.

AB

On Tuesday, April 14, 2015, Dave Crocker <[email-masked]> wrote:

> From: [email-masked] <javascript:;>
> To: Narelle Clark <[email-masked] <javascript:;>>, Narelle
> Clark
> <[email-masked] <javascript:;>>, Dave Crocker <
> [email-masked] <javascript:;>>, Dave
> Crocker <[email-masked] <javascript:;>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> diversity mailing list
> [email-masked] <javascript:;>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 22:33:34 -0700

On 4/14/2015 3:32 PM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
> In my opinion the author did not answer in far past to my comment

The only change you suggested was to correct a typo, from "It's" to
Its".  The error was corrected and the nature of the error did not
warrant burdening the list.

d/

---

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 22:43:08 +0200

Hi,

IMHO, the list needs discussions (the diversity list has no discussion or
no much work or has not much diverse) because it is a discussion list, so
burdening the list is needed for work to be progressed or followed up. Any
message/reply related to a draft should be ok to be submitted to the list.
If authors don't reply to reviewers, IMHO, it discourages discussions and
further reviews. My review procedure is to note the drafts that has no
replies and wait for the IESG request so I can put through my final review
without burdening my volunteering. However, that is not best practice but
that was caused by authors and editors that don't reply to volunteers.

Thank for the reply, I commented on 6 March to diversity list address and
to your personal email address related to the draft you submitted draft-00,
so I only seen author replied to SM's comment (may be the author only
replies to who author knows, is that diversity!!!!!!!!). My question was
why the author is not replying to me, am I not accepted by the authors? or
did I do something wrong, or may be my english was not perfect, or am I
from other type of group?. I noticed in my experience in IETF that groups
reply only to known groups/persons, it is mostly driven by selective-groups
not WGs. However, I did ask questions and I did disagree on the list, to
some texts the draft-00 is addressing. I waited for some time, because once
I was told by one ietf-WG chair that authors are bussy, so I give about one
month to three for replies. Any way I am happy that I got  a reply from you
because I wanted to meet you in IETF89 meeting  but failed to find you.
However, as I got a reply now I can continue now to review (I will repeat
my comments if needed).

Thanks for your work,

AB

> warrant burdening the list.

I thought I gave comments and disagreed with issues in draft-00, please see
6 March.