From sm@resistor.net Thu May 9 02:28:00 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3548C21F8F07 for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 02:28:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.339 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.339 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.260, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vqrrSPsBBqOR for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 02:27:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77A6C21F8EF2 for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 02:27:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r499RnaM012316; Thu, 9 May 2013 02:27:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1368091676; bh=yEm0/NlZ5e3dVgbOcvDHxWg9LmWQFRVkG0poxenkrQs=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=S1OBbhdosZ387T5BS5NJm9XmVq4g8oMcikhyQ5D/jtH7MDvnDPkR6hZWUYluCLyCw Yb0jXVYqT/6oTrgQgb2UXXEPNBrF8/DVqd1oXtLKZsbgZIlt8tLgI13LNQphEpX2oK KmHZXPfjBY81IRZg+c0VN4uUDAuAT1DC4SXX14E4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1368091676; i=@resistor.net; bh=yEm0/NlZ5e3dVgbOcvDHxWg9LmWQFRVkG0poxenkrQs=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=AZE6srh57geA2KN8LnRKKDf7Mqby5eJu65g9QJcifMTHM6rB9GjVAE5t4kzF3ouZu vPMx7PKN4P0T0c3nTkDIFhXZtI+yql+LayPzcrUb1M1nY5LroG2m/+rmWxy6+5C4Ch /X6p7v2CSWw9kR5WhcPnchddPjsxOXs+tgm6Gtlo= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130509015317.0c987358@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 02:23:25 -0700 To: "t.p." From: SM In-Reply-To: <000b01ce45b9$9002ec20$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> References: <51687C0D.8090804@labn.net> <5168C159.3050004@gmail.com> <51694B16.4090504@labn.net> <51695398.3000708@cs.tcd.ie> <7FABCCC7-D0B1-4B9A-B546-4F2FDE8B8DAE@isoc.org> <38b3500963cc19ad6b4a731541bead97.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EB736.6060801@cisco.com> <8684e2fdd4acda5cab143e70e0e45821.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EFC7E.90801@cisco.com> <20130419014446.GC1113@mx1.yitter.info> <1b273698cf7211ea2907e332bd19e4c4.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <005501ce3ce5$24eb49a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <5EAC602D-8F88-4A09-9ED2-13A42BED93AC@lilacglade.org> <000b01ce45b9$9002ec20$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: [Diversity] Organizational culture that could potentially foster bias X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 09:28:00 -0000 Hi Tom, At 08:11 30-04-2013, t.p. wrote: >For me, this came out of the blue. I have no idea why it is considered >that the IETF - note, IETF not IAB or IESG or IAOC - has become >concerned nor what evidence there is of concern. Several factors may contribute to an organizational culture that could potentially foster a "[censored] bias" [1]. "Female victims are judged as highly newsworthy". The IAOC was asked politically inappropriate questions. It was deemed as politically appropriate to provide a safe response. There are questions which should not be asked, even in the IETF. Regards, -sm 1. http://www.academia.edu/857391/Missing_Children_in_National_News_Coverage_Racial_and_Gender_Representations_of_Missing_Children_Cases From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Thu May 9 04:09:33 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5D6021F898B for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 04:09:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.965 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.965 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.033, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SARE_HTML_USL_OBFU=1.666] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cmWV9eVykx0O for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 04:09:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pd0-f175.google.com (mail-pd0-f175.google.com [209.85.192.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E86F021F898A for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 04:09:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pd0-f175.google.com with SMTP id y14so1920756pdi.6 for ; Thu, 09 May 2013 04:09:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=vPgDiYuphoEA4JDWfKXGSx43vmvWyIe6VJwG08PFZFk=; b=AztIYA85fhUM++PpCY+Grb83+6GPHZp8dKkOfafM4idi0CnWF1guBZRT7J139o38LW ZpinQLAiwZ+M22uYBTCBxbFmCAHDoeskvY3Xm7mijKmdKZfRhtHlRsFiYBNhdMkE1joI f7WFz66SECZ92QTxfx9mHubBY3AWe17T6cQypLRkeDfpoyD3fxAr3RmwzHoE0ybtKsfu TMft2JxRmn+FaxTSJ8S4a30Svd2zK0+VkHuhKOsU5+6wuBvaphK2al4qhSA3R5L87XLc Kj7R9cgDpkv/yq1cFoudWBR9JqpD0D64QeTzNV3vp59dZpkHnlR1PA8T0PVawxTwpXIa 6UrQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.144.5 with SMTP id si5mr12665686pab.6.1368097769687; Thu, 09 May 2013 04:09:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.143.132 with HTTP; Thu, 9 May 2013 04:09:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130509015317.0c987358@resistor.net> References: <51687C0D.8090804@labn.net> <5168C159.3050004@gmail.com> <51694B16.4090504@labn.net> <51695398.3000708@cs.tcd.ie> <7FABCCC7-D0B1-4B9A-B546-4F2FDE8B8DAE@isoc.org> <38b3500963cc19ad6b4a731541bead97.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EB736.6060801@cisco.com> <8684e2fdd4acda5cab143e70e0e45821.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EFC7E.90801@cisco.com> <20130419014446.GC1113@mx1.yitter.info> <1b273698cf7211ea2907e332bd19e4c4.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <005501ce3ce5$24eb49a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <5EAC602D-8F88-4A09-9ED2-13A42BED93AC@lilacglade.org> <000b01ce45b9$9002ec20$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509015317.0c987358@resistor.net> Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 12:09:29 +0100 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: SM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b6dca1494a1be04dc471581 Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Organizational culture that could potentially foster bias X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 11:09:33 -0000 --047d7b6dca1494a1be04dc471581 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I dont think that organisation culture develop bias, I think it depends on the organisation leaders and followers (i.e. followers are majority and they may be with/without visions). Mostly the org. participants culture don't represent the organisation culture, IMO it only represents the org culture if it *follows* the organisation visions. Bias is due to having different *visions* from the organisational visions. Old-participants may block new-participants, but IMHO new participants vision is still closer to the org. visions. I got a worning (in march) from old-participant leader to be blocked from participating on their wg list, I think that is bias not org. culture. AB On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 10:23 AM, SM wrote: > Hi Tom, > At 08:11 30-04-2013, t.p. wrote: > >> For me, this came out of the blue. I have no idea why it is considered >> that the IETF - note, IETF not IAB or IESG or IAOC - has become >> concerned nor what evidence there is of concern. >> > > Several factors may contribute to an organizational culture that could > potentially foster a "[censored] bias" [1]. "Female victims are judged as > highly newsworthy". > > The IAOC was asked politically inappropriate questions. It was deemed as > politically appropriate to provide a safe response. There are questions > which should not be asked, even in the IETF. > > Regards, > -sm > > 1. http://www.academia.edu/**857391/Missing_Children_in_** > National_News_Coverage_Racial_**and_Gender_Representations_of_** > Missing_Children_Cases > ______________________________**_________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/diversity > --047d7b6dca1494a1be04dc471581 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I dont think that organisation culture develop bias, = I think it depends on the organisation leaders and followers (i.e.=A0follow= ers are majority and they may=A0be with/without visions). Mostly the org. p= articipants culture don't represent the organisation culture, IMO it on= ly represents the org culture if it *follows* the organisation visions. Bia= s is due to having different *visions* from the organisational visions.
=A0
Old-participants may block new-participants, but IMHO ne= w participants vision is still closer to the org. visions. I got a worning = (in march) from old-participant leader to be blocked from participating on = their wg=A0list, I think that is bias not org. culture.
=A0
AB


On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 10:23 AM, SM &= lt;sm@resistor.net= > wrote:
Hi Tom,
At 08:11 30-04-2013, t.p. wrote:
For me, this came out of the blue. =A0I have no idea why it is considered that the IETF - note, IETF not IAB or IESG or IAOC - has become
concerned nor what evidence there is of concern.

Several factors may contribute to an organizational culture that could pote= ntially foster a "[censored] bias" [1]. "Female victims are = judged as highly newsworthy".

The IAOC was asked politically inappropriate questions. =A0It was deemed as= politically appropriate to provide a safe response. =A0There are questions= which should not be asked, even in the IETF.

Regards,
-sm

1. http://www.academia.edu/857391/Missing_Children_in_= National_News_Coverage_Racial_and_Gender_Representations_of_<= u>Missing_Children_Cases =A0
_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity

--047d7b6dca1494a1be04dc471581-- From bs7652@att.com Thu May 9 05:55:09 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 158B121F8B27 for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 05:55:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.11 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.11 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q13a-och6iv1 for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 05:54:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nbfkord-smmo08.seg.att.com (nbfkord-smmo08.seg.att.com [209.65.160.95]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8989121F8AF4 for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 05:54:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unknown [144.160.20.145] (EHLO mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) by nbfkord-smmo08.seg.att.com(mxl_mta-6.15.0-1) over TLS secured channel with ESMTP id 2ac9b815.0.63932.00-473.175616.nbfkord-smmo08.seg.att.com (envelope-from ); Thu, 09 May 2013 12:54:58 +0000 (UTC) X-MXL-Hash: 518b9ca20092ad9d-f447e44cf8cd31812343a27a308f7f0c527e7b2e Received: from enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r49CswkZ016936 for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 08:54:58 -0400 Received: from alpi133.aldc.att.com (alpi133.aldc.att.com [130.8.217.3]) by mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r49Cssca016909 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 08:54:54 -0400 Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUB9C.ITServices.sbc.com (gaalpa1msghub9c.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.36.89]) by alpi133.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor) for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 12:54:35 GMT Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.36.69]) by GAALPA1MSGHUB9C.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.36.89]) with mapi id 14.02.0342.003; Thu, 9 May 2013 08:54:35 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: " (diversity@ietf.org)" Thread-Topic: offer of diversity support Thread-Index: Ac5MtFqOmDpb7IidQoOuIgHVAqiwuA== Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 12:54:34 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302AFBA2@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.70.236.227] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RSA-Inspected: yes X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Spam: [F=0.2000000000; CM=0.500; S=0.200(2010122901)] X-MAIL-FROM: X-SOURCE-IP: [144.160.20.145] X-AnalysisOut: [v=2.0 cv=fuJrkiEf c=1 sm=0 a=ZRNLZ4dFUbCvG8UMqPvVAA==:17 a] X-AnalysisOut: [=llutadd9OrEA:10 a=ofMgfj31e3cA:10 a=BLceEmwcHowA:10 a=kj9] X-AnalysisOut: [zAlcOel0A:10 a=zQP7CpKOAAAA:8 a=XIqpo32RAAAA:8 a=q8w_tI4ng] X-AnalysisOut: [PwA:10 a=iPeilnULMKfXBEZtOaQA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10] Subject: [Diversity] offer of diversity support X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 12:55:09 -0000 I've read some email postings that suggested some people thought there migh= t be value in getting some outside help and expertise.=20 I had a chat Wednesday night with AT&T's Chief Diversity Officer, and menti= oned some of the discussions that were going on in IETF, and that there wer= e some people who though outside expertise might be useful. She said that i= f IETF were interested, she would be willing to help (provide advice, exper= tise, speakers, etc. -- depending on what IETF felt its needs were). She ac= tually sounded excited about offering to help (she's somewhat of an evangel= ist who believes passionately in the value of talent development and divers= ity). If there's interest in exploring this offer, please let me know. Barbara From sm@resistor.net Thu May 9 06:58:23 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 169E921F8E06 for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 06:58:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.382 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.382 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.217, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uZMN4eFwKvNm for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 06:58:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4476A21F8519 for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 06:58:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r49Dw7HP018781; Thu, 9 May 2013 06:58:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1368107893; bh=zqaZTvaxqmNiHYIdcznFmjKJiK2SA4GUGsxetrEI8rg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=AUV6IoRa/GKLL6qHhy/CfGdNXWSQvj3HHtgQHAjAP2nBCGHBEARNKevX62yR2jOUo GMvvxl2rA1Ke860kAOg1IzfX6aA9O6vk4+Wzxa+y+98v/LEiYdZjeRAn6FINh99sQl hKbSWobRLXmCykA1lFMdRETDrG/dUe49dZiCsJ/Y= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1368107893; i=@resistor.net; bh=zqaZTvaxqmNiHYIdcznFmjKJiK2SA4GUGsxetrEI8rg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=1xWxyILQb3dgMjLo9wENEMyJHEf2aWIJcKTkw7XQZprRHyu7h/vidXXjZIiia+JQQ +iUyiXL3rw0pZN1S694U6oz8DjNlNJ4NKt5fM6v6EBX37iKkiN8HJvXPjkeEptFM/W cFwvnP5iDF2afrVVLXeeasouU8bW2FtaKa2sZxXA= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130509061621.0d77f008@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 06:53:06 -0700 To: Abdussalam Baryun From: SM In-Reply-To: References: <51687C0D.8090804@labn.net> <5168C159.3050004@gmail.com> <51694B16.4090504@labn.net> <51695398.3000708@cs.tcd.ie> <7FABCCC7-D0B1-4B9A-B546-4F2FDE8B8DAE@isoc.org> <38b3500963cc19ad6b4a731541bead97.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EB736.6060801@cisco.com> <8684e2fdd4acda5cab143e70e0e45821.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EFC7E.90801@cisco.com> <20130419014446.GC1113@mx1.yitter.info> <1b273698cf7211ea2907e332bd19e4c4.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <005501ce3ce5$24eb49a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <5EAC602D-8F88-4A09-9ED2-13A42BED93AC@lilacglade.org> <000b01ce45b9$9002ec20$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509015317.0c987358@resistor.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Organizational culture that could potentially foster bias X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 13:58:23 -0000 Hi Abdussalam, At 04:09 09-05-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >Old-participants may block new-participants, but IMHO new >participants vision is still closer to the org. visions. I got a >worning (in march) from old-participant leader to be blocked from >participating on their wg list, I think that is bias not org. culture. I read that mailing list. I could not identify "old-participant leader". What I read was about a person having to take a decision because of complaints from other participants. There is recourse if a decision is arbitrary. One definition of "bias" is: personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment. If someone else was in the position to take the decision, would he or she have reached the same conclusion? Regards, -sm From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Thu May 9 07:20:19 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C67021F8EAD for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 07:20:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NuJdW4AHaRWT for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 07:20:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-x232.google.com (mail-pb0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D4A321F8E79 for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 07:20:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pb0-f50.google.com with SMTP id um15so1992254pbc.23 for ; Thu, 09 May 2013 07:20:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=xzUkig2qaXDSM8NSqNS7CRABt20ke/o5pEPnrHMlDRA=; b=zwC8hoXPtfSIrxST2OtfV5qg10zIN+wLi48t4FYRSl5OYH+qleog4i8sL7OX3bxbMz FKxnspaBSywX/0qu6MYMzfMYsPmft4wVjcmTFee5oUoFW8y+6RnAUixpdRNWSCJ6zASf dvjtJIGKpf1ENhwzS7rbwJ/mMoEj3zCywWQTWV78E4iYnGuyF9tElwkCAazonFQs7o4b dNaQR03jYUMM7QO7ZuSyaMaX5rREKW+HiIyhGr6jrfrPu/Arw4X1++GgbQNajFCSh0qa TmUX9hwQuWsk3lN4G9WgwPE3V7q/0dgxzKNTkMqw9DZ7OBuTp6FpsxK3rs5672iqYFxl wDdg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.68.14.6 with SMTP id l6mr12840440pbc.202.1368109216600; Thu, 09 May 2013 07:20:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.143.132 with HTTP; Thu, 9 May 2013 07:20:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130509061621.0d77f008@resistor.net> References: <51687C0D.8090804@labn.net> <5168C159.3050004@gmail.com> <51694B16.4090504@labn.net> <51695398.3000708@cs.tcd.ie> <7FABCCC7-D0B1-4B9A-B546-4F2FDE8B8DAE@isoc.org> <38b3500963cc19ad6b4a731541bead97.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EB736.6060801@cisco.com> <8684e2fdd4acda5cab143e70e0e45821.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EFC7E.90801@cisco.com> <20130419014446.GC1113@mx1.yitter.info> <1b273698cf7211ea2907e332bd19e4c4.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <005501ce3ce5$24eb49a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <5EAC602D-8F88-4A09-9ED2-13A42BED93AC@lilacglade.org> <000b01ce45b9$9002ec20$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509015317.0c987358@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509061621.0d77f008@resistor.net> Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 15:20:16 +0100 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: SM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec520ee87de964104dc49bf1a Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Organizational culture that could potentially foster bias X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 14:20:19 -0000 --bcaec520ee87de964104dc49bf1a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi SM, The leader I ment is a wg co-chair. Where is decision recourse in ietf? I mean by bias as; some one following others visions not the organisation visions/goals. The complaints were about many inputs on the list, which is I think is strange culture to complain about some one participating frequently, they want to control my freedom/culture. How can majority persons culture more reasonable than one person culture. Any input as long as related to ietf business should be respected not blocked. > If someone else was in the position to take the decision, would he or she have reached the same conclusion? there is always two position making decision (two way communication), so I see many people not interested to continue participate (following-position) but in my case I like to make it clear that there is a problem, other may just make a decision to leave. Leader/managers have a good position so they remain as long as other side gives up :-) AB On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 2:53 PM, SM wrote: > Hi Abdussalam, > > At 04:09 09-05-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: > >> Old-participants may block new-participants, but IMHO new participants >> vision is still closer to the org. visions. I got a worning (in march) from >> old-participant leader to be blocked from participating on their wg list, I >> think that is bias not org. culture. >> > > I read that mailing list. I could not identify "old-participant leader". > What I read was about a person having to take a decision because of > complaints from other participants. There is recourse if a decision is > arbitrary. > > One definition of "bias" is: personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment. > If someone else was in the position to take the decision, would he or she > have reached the same conclusion? > > Regards, > -sm > --bcaec520ee87de964104dc49bf1a Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi SM,
=A0
The leader I ment is a= wg co-chair. Where is=A0decision=A0recourse in ietf?
I mean by b= ias as; some one following others visions not the organisation visions/goal= s.
The complaints were about many inputs on the list, which is I think is= strange culture to complain about some one participating frequently, they = want to control my freedom/culture. How can majority persons culture more r= easonable than one person culture. Any input as long as related to ietf bus= iness should be respected not blocked.
=A0
>=A0If someone else was in the position to take the d= ecision, would he or she have reached the same conclusion?
=A0
there is always two position=A0making decision (two way communicati= on), so I see many people not interested to continue participate (following= -position)=A0but in my case I like to make it clear that there is a problem= , other may just make a decision to leave. Leader/managers have a good posi= tion so they remain as long as other side=A0gives up=A0:-)
=A0
AB


On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 2:53 PM, SM &l= t;sm@resistor.net&= gt; wrote:
Hi Abdussalam,

At 04:09 09-05-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
Old-participants may block new-participants, but IMHO new participants visi= on is still closer to the org. visions. I got a worning (in march) from old= -participant leader to be blocked from participating on their wg list, I th= ink that is bias not org. culture.

I read that mailing list. =A0I could not identify "old-participant lea= der". =A0What I read was about a person having to take a decision beca= use of complaints from other participants. =A0There is recourse if a decisi= on is arbitrary.

One definition of "bias" is: personal and sometimes unreasoned ju= dgment. =A0If someone else was in the position to take the decision, would = he or she have reached the same conclusion?

Regards,
-sm

--bcaec520ee87de964104dc49bf1a-- From sm@resistor.net Thu May 9 10:30:12 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA1D521F8F4D for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 10:30:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.413 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.413 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.186, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BBiXIT7MJVwe for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 10:30:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8A7C21F8FEC for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 10:30:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r49HU0t1006435; Thu, 9 May 2013 10:30:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1368120605; bh=Vxv/l//Hd679JDA9NjfiTQcI9/So3mY1zxOvrK879pY=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=GQOKHNQ4zfx4pvcrNIr4zMG9TqV7bC9rBWG5GwSyW4RD3hXa7j2pltlk+0wbuGESO NK3kihtTtaT7adlxfmcKAOIcqENP/MRkhliU1jeqn/fIZGi2NQmoGT9cAu4qc69NmQ w8/QoLLo5ybsP2H+c+mjfibnPKLPDu5shvRbi2aA= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1368120605; i=@resistor.net; bh=Vxv/l//Hd679JDA9NjfiTQcI9/So3mY1zxOvrK879pY=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=LP/kiWfG4SFvVQZ6x6fkhNjUx3nX1O1prXrpgARXYz7FpMUDxUmvf7teayEoOkcXt Cpwy9dXMYaH4aAYZDozzYSyxYG2sm3yZ/JS/nZB7eypLeZIpJiTLZC5ymGG5wdN6bz 8sjsTqJw9F6J4s6EDtRdxTtgd/SQqZo1usnkFqWg= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130509080241.0d4bc0a0@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 10:15:50 -0700 To: Abdussalam Baryun From: SM In-Reply-To: References: <51687C0D.8090804@labn.net> <5168C159.3050004@gmail.com> <51694B16.4090504@labn.net> <51695398.3000708@cs.tcd.ie> <7FABCCC7-D0B1-4B9A-B546-4F2FDE8B8DAE@isoc.org> <38b3500963cc19ad6b4a731541bead97.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EB736.6060801@cisco.com> <8684e2fdd4acda5cab143e70e0e45821.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EFC7E.90801@cisco.com> <20130419014446.GC1113@mx1.yitter.info> <1b273698cf7211ea2907e332bd19e4c4.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <005501ce3ce5$24eb49a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <5EAC602D-8F88-4A09-9ED2-13A42BED93AC@lilacglade.org> <000b01ce45b9$9002ec20$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509015317.0c987358@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509061621.0d77f008@resistor.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Organizational culture that could potentially foster bias X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 17:30:13 -0000 Hi Abdussalam, At 07:20 09-05-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >The leader I ment is a wg co-chair. Where is decision recourse in ietf? Part of description for WG co-chair is as follows: "The Chair has ultimate responsibility for ensuring that a working group achieves forward progress and meets its milestones. The Chair is also responsible to ensure that the working group operates in an open and fair manner." A WG co-chair usually does the work for free. That person is accountable for what happens within the working group. The recourse is described in RFC 2026. >I mean by bias as; some one following others visions not the >organisation visions/goals. >The complaints were about many inputs on the list, which is I think >is strange culture to complain about some one participating >frequently, they want to control my freedom/culture. How can >majority persons culture more reasonable than one person culture. >Any input as long as related to ietf business should be respected not blocked. I sometimes hear the "they want to control my freedom" argument from people located in a country within North America. On reading the message at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/diversity/current/msg00045.html I see that you are located in Africa. It seems that a country in North America and a country in Africa have something in common. If every WG participant sends a message for each message posted by other WG participants the effect is a lot of messages to the mailing list. This is usually where the mailing list moderator sends out a polite note. There might be an expectation that the WG participants will be understanding. I don't understand the comment about majority persons culture. I don't have any opinion about what is reasonable within an IETF context. The WG Chair is responsible for identifying what IETF business can be discussed on the WG mailing list. >there is always two position making decision (two way >communication), so I see many people not interested to continue >participate (following-position) but in my case I like to make it >clear that there is a problem, other may just make a decision to >leave. Leader/managers have a good position so they remain as long >as other side gives up :-) Working for free is usually not considered as a good position. Regards, -sm From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Thu May 9 11:39:44 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6031421F9012 for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 11:39:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.332 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.332 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.268, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fqb-5dvNtiXP for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 11:39:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x22a.google.com (mail-wi0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 206C921F8EE8 for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 11:39:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wi0-f170.google.com with SMTP id hr14so689209wib.3 for ; Thu, 09 May 2013 11:39:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Vd/ThO2CSB5IoqNJlwzW4D6GpUC4hfjhuspZpUdehic=; b=i4krWrn+ElrKe7Lg+uvZOGilECL0a81mkfEJli67ssUh+TI87j84YoXEC4mGNahGtl MSf0HBo7sO4v+oVguYaRP5/ekrRJhvQ5VqCxTOe1RWW3B+mISBRGpdwMdZl8BjdVtYIO bIKKMdZxyF4Phm/ZeiHcm3jMGiBuBnCjyNQN73FMctpsA5/C9uXn82TluOfMvlBw2Pcv GGkTV2V2TR7eea6qCuOJ0kp9iepkv2w/nj40gYuptbxVRwhcNC9SHoClcbAs+HCPPf+7 qDCnkKptyczl9YASWRmoSOY8sZbQ4OH3xmiPWi/upyQx+uno+XkWNyGN0NIzcIqW666z 4Qbg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.88.231 with SMTP id bj7mr30782755wib.5.1368124781771; Thu, 09 May 2013 11:39:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.180.80.135 with HTTP; Thu, 9 May 2013 11:39:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130509080241.0d4bc0a0@resistor.net> References: <51687C0D.8090804@labn.net> <5168C159.3050004@gmail.com> <51694B16.4090504@labn.net> <51695398.3000708@cs.tcd.ie> <7FABCCC7-D0B1-4B9A-B546-4F2FDE8B8DAE@isoc.org> <38b3500963cc19ad6b4a731541bead97.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EB736.6060801@cisco.com> <8684e2fdd4acda5cab143e70e0e45821.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EFC7E.90801@cisco.com> <20130419014446.GC1113@mx1.yitter.info> <1b273698cf7211ea2907e332bd19e4c4.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <005501ce3ce5$24eb49a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <5EAC602D-8F88-4A09-9ED2-13A42BED93AC@lilacglade.org> <000b01ce45b9$9002ec20$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509015317.0c987358@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509061621.0d77f008@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509080241.0d4bc0a0@resistor.net> Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 19:39:41 +0100 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: SM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0443048aa03fb604dc4d5f29 Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Organizational culture that could potentially foster bias X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 18:39:44 -0000 --f46d0443048aa03fb604dc4d5f29 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Participants are also responsible to comment on all internet work done or work in progress. Why do we comment on the volume of input as long as people are happy to volunteer in management or participation? If the volume of input increase we will need increase in the number of chairs or managers. This is normal, why don't we think of scenario of volume of input reason is the volume of participants not the number of input per participant. Assume we get one million ietf subscriber just send one comment per week in the IETF, should we block all or choose which to block, my solution is to increase managers to accept all and react for progress (we already have one million volunteers so use it). IMHO, there is no excuse of not able to handle input volume, if you are not able increase number of management to make progress, but please don't cut your customers down. Do you mean management in IETF cannot handle future of the high volume of Internet-community inputs? AB On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 6:15 PM, SM wrote: > Hi Abdussalam, > > At 07:20 09-05-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: > >> The leader I ment is a wg co-chair. Where is decision recourse in ietf? >> > > Part of description for WG co-chair is as follows: > > "The Chair has ultimate responsibility for ensuring that a working > group achieves forward progress and meets its milestones. The > Chair is also responsible to ensure that the working group > operates in an open and fair manner." > > A WG co-chair usually does the work for free. That person is accountable > for what happens within the working group. > > The recourse is described in RFC 2026. > > > I mean by bias as; some one following others visions not the organisation >> visions/goals. >> The complaints were about many inputs on the list, which is I think is >> strange culture to complain about some one participating frequently, they >> want to control my freedom/culture. How can majority persons culture more >> reasonable than one person culture. Any input as long as related to ietf >> business should be respected not blocked. >> > > I sometimes hear the "they want to control my freedom" argument from > people located in a country within North America. On reading the message > at http://www.ietf.org/mail-**archive/web/diversity/current/** > msg00045.htmlI see that you are located in Africa. It seems that a country in North > America and a country in Africa have something in common. > > If every WG participant sends a message for each message posted by other > WG participants the effect is a lot of messages to the mailing list. This > is usually where the mailing list moderator sends out a polite note. There > might be an expectation that the WG participants will be understanding. > > I don't understand the comment about majority persons culture. I don't > have any opinion about what is reasonable within an IETF context. The WG > Chair is responsible for identifying what IETF business can be discussed on > the WG mailing list. > > > there is always two position making decision (two way communication), so >> I see many people not interested to continue participate >> (following-position) but in my case I like to make it clear that there is a >> problem, other may just make a decision to leave. Leader/managers have a >> good position so they remain as long as other side gives up :-) >> > > Working for free is usually not considered as a good position. > > Regards, > -sm > --f46d0443048aa03fb604dc4d5f29 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Participants are also responsible to comment on all i= nternet work done or work in progress. Why do we comment on the volume of i= nput as long as people are happy to volunteer in management or participatio= n? If the volume of input increase we will need increase in the number of c= hairs or managers. This is normal, why don't we think of scenario of vo= lume of input reason is the volume of participants not the number of input = per participant.
=A0
Assume=A0we get=A0one million ietf subscriber just send = one comment per week in the IETF, should we block all or choose which to bl= ock, my solution is to increase managers to accept all and react for progre= ss=A0(we already have one million volunteers so use it).
=A0
IMHO, there is no excuse of not able to handle input vol= ume, if you are not able increase number of management to make progress, bu= t please don't cut your customers down. Do you mean management in IETF = cannot handle future of the high volume of=A0Internet-community inputs?
=A0
AB


On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 6:15 PM, SM &l= t;sm@resistor.net&= gt; wrote:
Hi Abdussalam,

At 07:20 09-05-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
The leader I ment is a wg co-chair. Where is decision recourse in ietf?

Part of description for WG co-chair is as follows:

=A0 "The Chair has ultimate responsibility for ensuring that a working=
=A0 =A0group achieves forward progress and meets its milestones. =A0The
=A0 =A0Chair is also responsible to ensure that the working group
=A0 =A0operates in an open and fair manner."

A WG co-chair usually does the work for free. =A0That person is accountable= for what happens within the working group.

The recourse is described in RFC 2026.


I mean by bias as; some one following others visions not the organisation v= isions/goals.
The complaints were about many inputs on the list, which is I think is stra= nge culture to complain about some one participating frequently, they want = to control my freedom/culture. How can majority persons culture more reason= able than one person culture. Any input as long as related to ietf business= should be respected not blocked.

I sometimes hear the "they want to control my freedom" argument f= rom people located in a country within North America. =A0On reading the mes= sage at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web= /diversity/current/msg00045.html I see that you are located in A= frica. =A0It seems that a country in North America and a country in Africa = have something in common.

If every WG participant sends a message for each message posted by other WG= participants the effect is a lot of messages to the mailing list. =A0This = is usually where the mailing list moderator sends out a polite note. =A0The= re might be an expectation that the WG participants will be understanding.<= br>
I don't understand the comment about majority persons culture. =A0I don= 't have any opinion about what is reasonable within an IETF context. = =A0The WG Chair is responsible for identifying what IETF business can be di= scussed on the WG mailing list.


there is always two position making decision (two way communication), so I = see many people not interested to continue participate (following-position)= but in my case I like to make it clear that there is a problem, other may = just make a decision to leave. Leader/managers have a good position so they= remain as long as other side gives up :-)

Working for free is usually not considered as a good position.

Regards,
-sm =A0

--f46d0443048aa03fb604dc4d5f29-- From sm@resistor.net Thu May 9 12:49:34 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE0E621F9239 for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 12:49:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.437 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.162, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dJeBRqlaBn9B for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 12:49:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C0E521F914C for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 12:49:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r49Jn4gX022701; Thu, 9 May 2013 12:49:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1368128949; bh=IC8lImcrtBKRL5blouK1EuUW5ES+jBsnsaywJiHnKqs=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=kzxUFf80bSndRHuQVYHxM7nkQPDmP3H0ewGivSGavLcYIYSoal4M9L7tIlbHPfuP3 DaRznF6YRsNciT2Su4Bl4x8pHFLRUlOtpQU8Z+o5LjeaP8o7Yo/bmtDHXBj60QKjO/ S+l2n7jYwEiOh8/S3d18orhsQSKMsuxuxa59VfPI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1368128949; i=@resistor.net; bh=IC8lImcrtBKRL5blouK1EuUW5ES+jBsnsaywJiHnKqs=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=ay30GjSUDp0xc3t61D6wFRUssU/ypc/1YZb1y5ZRzKCXXO9V0yXqM5zBxbNzmFmCr 9YdGZ+Qm3pDYqjzKSizHmE2m7ImpK6rG+leEQguqn1bqLRn7WG2SQnVp9S4FTynwka t26C+d2OepKE+y4WsUsTjoT54V8KSOohf9L6Ivds= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130509114757.0c5d4610@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 12:42:16 -0700 To: Abdussalam Baryun From: SM In-Reply-To: References: <51687C0D.8090804@labn.net> <5168C159.3050004@gmail.com> <51694B16.4090504@labn.net> <51695398.3000708@cs.tcd.ie> <7FABCCC7-D0B1-4B9A-B546-4F2FDE8B8DAE@isoc.org> <38b3500963cc19ad6b4a731541bead97.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EB736.6060801@cisco.com> <8684e2fdd4acda5cab143e70e0e45821.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EFC7E.90801@cisco.com> <20130419014446.GC1113@mx1.yitter.info> <1b273698cf7211ea2907e332bd19e4c4.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <005501ce3ce5$24eb49a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <5EAC602D-8F88-4A09-9ED2-13A42BED93AC@lilacglade.org> <000b01ce45b9$9002ec20$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509015317.0c987358@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509061621.0d77f008@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509080241.0d4bc0a0@resistor.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Organizational culture that could potentially foster bias X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 May 2013 19:49:35 -0000 Hi Abdussalam, At 11:39 09-05-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >Participants are also responsible to comment on all internet work >done or work in progress. Why do we comment on the volume of input >as long as people are happy to volunteer in management or >participation? If the volume of input increase we will need It's not because a person volunteers that I take him/her for granted. >IMHO, there is no excuse of not able to handle input volume, if you >are not able increase number of management to make progress, but >please don't cut your customers down. Do you mean management in IETF >cannot handle future of the high volume of Internet-community inputs? I can only offer an individual opinion. I do not know what IETF management thinks or plans to do. Customers are people who pay me. I don't have to find an excuse if I am unable to handle input volume; I submit a letter of resignation. In my opinion the Internet community tends to be biased when it comes to volunteering for work. :-) Regards, -sm From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Thu May 9 23:00:05 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 306BA21F8E66 for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 23:00:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.627 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.627 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.973, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 81aDFpzJzH+9 for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 23:00:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pd0-f182.google.com (mail-pd0-f182.google.com [209.85.192.182]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1442F21F8E6B for ; Thu, 9 May 2013 23:00:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pd0-f182.google.com with SMTP id 3so2548573pdj.13 for ; Thu, 09 May 2013 22:59:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=wlAn3pIbmyZy5vLzu7lzRV6wAfMjz5Yf36ql3BUdDtU=; b=1H7ARxpwaa5D7b2s+0wnJ7sBYg/sQCWPApqLGPOY/pBmAEE8vBx/KZxtv/DBoZW/Ra B+VPCSwmNBktgYhNQOVdp6czxLTkJzDZ2MFnOH8gr6xrc8s3nnA4I8ROzjczv+Ch3nir M++Q1Fujso5zZvNRFK8xwvme8P12EHp+uFUbaTUcUH98bCDx/v3k+4rgAm2AQKE4q1bU XJLO3cV1M8JI9Btcx+3eXU6nuQtbRVq2fClePse+/jmoZDY69wylv1y1HLcRXeIJCccn SFu62EeIK1H6lp9JBFn1iFimNP183nsfY7DAfGiGwE5fJh3eonNSIt4b3pgePENoXXC8 7uTQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.68.14.6 with SMTP id l6mr15936092pbc.202.1368165599754; Thu, 09 May 2013 22:59:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.143.132 with HTTP; Thu, 9 May 2013 22:59:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130509114757.0c5d4610@resistor.net> References: <51687C0D.8090804@labn.net> <5168C159.3050004@gmail.com> <51694B16.4090504@labn.net> <51695398.3000708@cs.tcd.ie> <7FABCCC7-D0B1-4B9A-B546-4F2FDE8B8DAE@isoc.org> <38b3500963cc19ad6b4a731541bead97.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EB736.6060801@cisco.com> <8684e2fdd4acda5cab143e70e0e45821.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <516EFC7E.90801@cisco.com> <20130419014446.GC1113@mx1.yitter.info> <1b273698cf7211ea2907e332bd19e4c4.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <005501ce3ce5$24eb49a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <5EAC602D-8F88-4A09-9ED2-13A42BED93AC@lilacglade.org> <000b01ce45b9$9002ec20$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509015317.0c987358@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509061621.0d77f008@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509080241.0d4bc0a0@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20130509114757.0c5d4610@resistor.net> Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 07:59:59 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: SM Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Organizational culture that could potentially foster bias X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 06:00:05 -0000 Hi SM > It's not because a person volunteers that I take him/her for granted. That is why diversity of volunteering is good for IETF discussions, that person will try to gain that grant through discuss, work, or progress. >>IMHO, there is no excuse of not able to handle input volume, if you >>are not able increase number of management to make progress, but >>please don't cut your customers down. Do you mean management in IETF >>cannot handle future of the high volume of Internet-community inputs? > > I can only offer an individual opinion. individual opinions are the most important ones, usually managers should listen to thoes. > I do not know what IETF > management thinks or plans to do. That is why we need more awareness in IETF, may be they don't know either. If we don't know the plans, then we may be used by other organisations. Diversity of management is important. > Customers are people who pay > me. IMHO, customers are people who use your *product* or use your organisation products. In IETF our *products* are documents and standards. The payment price can be zero as long as your product has no gaurantee of usefulness. > I don't have to find an excuse if I am unable to handle input > volume; I submit a letter of resignation. That is always the right decision if not able to do the job. IETF management still replaces empty positions with new handelers if some resign. > In my opinion the Internet > community tends to be biased when it comes to volunteering for work. :-) I think bias depends on the community cultures and their diversity in IETF. The problem is that many people culture (i.e. way of life/process) is to work mostly to gain money, and few people volunteer work to gain users/customers. IMHO, IETF is volunteering its work for gaining users/participants, and hopefully to be diversed in its inputs, processes and uses. Best Wishes AB