From sm@resistor.net Sun Jun 16 10:19:14 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 AFCA121F9CF8 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:19:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.495 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.104, 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 r01LDxPb7qg4 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:19:14 -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 0ACA521F9C57 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:19:13 -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 r5GHJ833020317 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:19:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371403152; bh=Yss2iKTRVnBWclBMqZgm+qqfta7k5/kQgahYyckycB8=; h=Date:To:From:Subject; b=BjN7fesSuz3DprKoYLxcLBB6Hndhre9mWIEZOMZqxkTTJDh5IRb1/WlQMIzAoRi2R JbIeyPV7zbx7+39x4Cnnx15NbgTEvjJqM6e3NDbSOJlJ8Ed6hnTSn1KimILuxVjWLK BWEm8n3kKgcqJqYmd4F2Y/i9QzmA5yhylqCEVglI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371403152; i=@resistor.net; bh=Yss2iKTRVnBWclBMqZgm+qqfta7k5/kQgahYyckycB8=; h=Date:To:From:Subject; b=IXdCDTS7Ch8tt/AVB/S6+BvDbZ0yA6RASsWRMErxjPjOrQqj7BmQ0Eddeso/i+xwR Bs1gGuRdPqo80Y72YvUnMt5cCpLpTI1DhlYtm/qrJY4n6TDOW+GB4E/oSnYrQxE2Xg RvzG3Z5udvI6IZJWQGwlQeHYbpRuTAYqsgwzUFPs= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:17:07 -0700 To: diversity@ietf.org From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 17:19:14 -0000 Hello, The meaning of "making allowances for someone" is to allow someone to behave in a way that you would not usually accept, because of a problem or because there is a special reason. Last week there were several messages on the ietf@ mailing list about "Content-free Last Call comments". Most of the people who posted on the thread usually participate in discussions on the ietf@ mailing list. I took a quick look at the mailing list archives for the previous two months. I only saw one message from someone who is from China or Japan. The IETF had a meeting in China and in Japan. There are RFC authors from China and Japan. There is an IAB member from China. I would expect people from these two countries and other countries to express their opinions about the issues being discussed. What is visible is that participants from the United States dominate the discussions. A better description would be that people from the United States have been participating in the IETF since a long time and it is normal for people from the United States to control the discussions or rule it by superior authority. The question I would ask is whether people who have been participating in IETF discussions since a long time make allowances for someone who has not been participating in such discussions. Regards, -sm From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Sun Jun 16 12:19:48 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 336AC21F95DD for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:19:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 IywtG9U39uXJ for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:19:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-x22a.google.com (mail-pb0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B54E21F9590 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:19:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pb0-f42.google.com with SMTP id un1so2093625pbc.15 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:19:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=5vf92bEgg897iLISMNna7qVCzZm+rStcshF21eQgdiw=; b=XyOtWwj6JeEA5oPwdgRS10l84vNcF9wvvix9I/fm1vmAdYB6+0LP0I0ocbkwksP5ul o8YbpBzL9nsne/fbF8QD+OZMXB8gvGRYiRKglNFuGeG8RJ2fwSmo2FYAi7xiTz08II4w Ka7EfiC1mStRwUzDdo2qbgMsBSIYTDiv23jOee57eKmYeMTZoXiuI4rwq//+I10asaHv EfcYPwg2lwVTnnzLRHIp6nAZsv1nX0NrhSnpP/ER37kMR/YjyAS9hebNamYY1nnsgzRR IbFoMX/+L5HhRqhlLxaE68gz7QRWVu+d7zewP3EMv1DInkv6FvpGxtQNnsc3fuzbdO89 Yxwg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.68.52.10 with SMTP id p10mr10254630pbo.92.1371410387052; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:19:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:19:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 21:19:46 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: SM Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 19:19:48 -0000 Hi SM, I am in UK but my origin is from Africa (I do participate with patients), but I like to have this international (the Internet World) experience with all regions which I have been to and socially know the culture of all regions except south america. I think I will give allowance to people that dominate to give there input equally with other regions (I don't want give minority any special allowance, and also majority ones). I don't agree that North America participants are dominating or ruling the discussions. I only beleive that great engineers are ruled by reason within discussions. If there is something like ruling without reason then a complain SHOULD be produced and followed by procedures. > The question I would ask is whether people who have been > participating in IETF discussions since a long time make allowances > for someone who has not been participating in such discussions. Yes we all SHOULD give allowance to all (no discrimination, including titles as well), we all participants are equal, old, new, manager, non manager, etc. I usually get bad behaviors from some participants but I notice the ADs with my complaints (most people don't like to complain) and they warn/punish thoes who are out of procedure. Furthermore, no one has the authority to *not allow participation*. People from Japan or China, may not participate but I think they are listening and some day they will participate (maybe when all get to respect all), and when they do, the discussions will be interesting. IMHO, they/I don't need allowance from any one but they/I need more opportunity/awareness in Japan and China, that the IETF is not ruled by one region but all regions equally depending on participation. I think that thoes inputs that were giving me hard time SHOULD be deleted from the IETF list and others, thoes inputs are like noise (out of procedure) and I think some societies don't like the way management are handling the noise. They SHOULD delet noise from the records if they want progress in IETF. I will work on that when I get time because management just solve future list not the past list. That makes many not like to participate including me. AB On 6/16/13, SM wrote: > Hello, > > The meaning of "making allowances for someone" is to allow someone to > behave in a way that you would not usually accept, because of a > problem or because there is a special reason. > > Last week there were several messages on the ietf@ mailing list about > "Content-free Last Call comments". Most of the people who posted on > the thread usually participate in discussions on the ietf@ mailing > list. I took a quick look at the mailing list archives for the > previous two months. I only saw one message from someone who is from > China or Japan. > > The IETF had a meeting in China and in Japan. There are RFC authors > from China and Japan. There is an IAB member from China. I would > expect people from these two countries and other countries to express > their opinions about the issues being discussed. What is visible is > that participants from the United States dominate the discussions. A > better description would be that people from the United States have > been participating in the IETF since a long time and it is normal for > people from the United States to control the discussions or rule it > by superior authority. > > The question I would ask is whether people who have been > participating in IETF discussions since a long time make allowances > for someone who has not been participating in such discussions. > > Regards, > -sm > > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > From arturo.servin@gmail.com Sun Jun 16 23:31:06 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 0FFBA21F9A81 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 23:31:06 -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] 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 2gWSTlZlENQX for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 23:31:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-x22e.google.com (mail-pb0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89D5D21F9A83 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 23:31:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pb0-f46.google.com with SMTP id rq2so2438838pbb.19 for ; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 23:31:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/jORs8T77/ZKO03qKZ2GsPhcfsmvrFA8Wo0hE7v/Y7Y=; b=uAI4ZT0zdmVdFaORayOsKFXMZwLe55VGPLgwanZ90QvQ28PyIza3sdc3lAhDHHdBG+ FA6x1kscPFN7wP9Cof+RQ+2y7za2vu3QArZVKxFuMmUQWeBVj8vsltLKZUF9tNvZkXd/ aN1MU1oYswDh72qYztGogf0Mz5I8yo/DoD5ed6VMciCve8nclPN6l+kcw3vSKN6rjtPj aWjBsnTqkqaUSkwtzdwGLL5qDJ6acIfFSztFIyM+Vnl2X697JVfmRKtf2+Fij5R/RmCQ 2EkgPe6JAgJS/5jaOAlHLx19NJ/mbmX9aswjYjaWJgcNqaOSLm9AgXlynWEjO68sw/3/ KLpQ== X-Received: by 10.68.247.131 with SMTP id ye3mr11712375pbc.87.1371450664070; Sun, 16 Jun 2013 23:31:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Arturos-MacBook-Pro.local (110-170-171-184.static.asianet.co.th. [110.170.171.184]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id bs2sm13563491pad.17.2013.06.16.23.31.01 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 16 Jun 2013 23:31:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:30:59 +0700 From: Arturo Servin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: SM References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:31:06 -0000 Or that they have more time to discuss ... :) I guess is that they have more time in the ietf, I found the discussion interesting but I felt that I didn't have many things to add, so I just silently followed it. regards, as On 6/17/13 12:17 AM, SM wrote: > Hello, > > The meaning of "making allowances for someone" is to allow someone to > behave in a way that you would not usually accept, because of a problem > or because there is a special reason. > > Last week there were several messages on the ietf@ mailing list about > "Content-free Last Call comments". Most of the people who posted on the > thread usually participate in discussions on the ietf@ mailing list. I > took a quick look at the mailing list archives for the previous two > months. I only saw one message from someone who is from China or Japan. > > The IETF had a meeting in China and in Japan. There are RFC authors > from China and Japan. There is an IAB member from China. I would > expect people from these two countries and other countries to express > their opinions about the issues being discussed. What is visible is > that participants from the United States dominate the discussions. A > better description would be that people from the United States have been > participating in the IETF since a long time and it is normal for people > from the United States to control the discussions or rule it by superior > authority. > > The question I would ask is whether people who have been participating > in IETF discussions since a long time make allowances for someone who > has not been participating in such discussions. > > Regards, > -sm > > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity From kathleen.moriarty@emc.com Mon Jun 17 00:38:11 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 0154A21F9AD8 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 00:38:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.799 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.200, BAYES_00=-2.599] 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 5uqU27QmNUcL for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 00:38:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (hop-nat-141.emc.com [168.159.213.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EB0F21F9AD1 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 00:38:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hop04-l1d11-si02.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI02.isus.emc.com [10.254.111.55]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id r5H7btsG019576 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:37:59 -0400 Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (mailhubhoprd06.lss.emc.com [10.254.222.130]) by hop04-l1d11-si02.isus.emc.com (RSA Interceptor); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:37:39 -0400 Received: from mxhub20.corp.emc.com (mxhub20.corp.emc.com [10.254.93.49]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id r5H7bcw3015628; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:37:39 -0400 Received: from mx15a.corp.emc.com ([169.254.1.184]) by mxhub20.corp.emc.com ([10.254.93.49]) with mapi; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:37:38 -0400 From: "Moriarty, Kathleen" To: Arturo Servin Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:37:31 -0400 Thread-Topic: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone Thread-Index: Ac5rLYqWq42ovpD1TMmvecUggWKfnA== Message-ID: <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-EMM-MHVC: 1 Cc: SM , "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 07:38:12 -0000 I am at a conference in Bangkok and had an interesting conversation last ni= ght at the social. My talk tomorrow includes the MILE work. When I mentio= ned this someone commented that he really likes the IETF and has followed m= ailing lists like PKIX for years, but never participates. His initial plan= was to monitor for a month, then become active. He kept saying in 2 more = months, then just figured everyone else was smarter than him, so monitoring= was better. I filled him in more on the culture and that even very smart = people are not always right, even if they assert their answers as if they a= re. The next issue he brought up was conflicts on lists. It is not in his cult= ure to engage in conflict, so he continues to monitor. Interestingly, he w= as very positive on the IETF work as a venue to get things done and of the = work that happens. I'm still thinking about this one because he was so pos= itive. Thank you, Kathleen=20 Sent from my iPhone On Jun 17, 2013, at 1:31 PM, "Arturo Servin" wrot= e: >=20 > Or that they have more time to discuss ... >=20 > :) >=20 > I guess is that they have more time in the ietf, I found the discussio= n > interesting but I felt that I didn't have many things to add, so I just > silently followed it. >=20 > regards, > as >=20 > On 6/17/13 12:17 AM, SM wrote: >> Hello, >>=20 >> The meaning of "making allowances for someone" is to allow someone to >> behave in a way that you would not usually accept, because of a problem >> or because there is a special reason. >>=20 >> Last week there were several messages on the ietf@ mailing list about >> "Content-free Last Call comments". Most of the people who posted on the >> thread usually participate in discussions on the ietf@ mailing list. I >> took a quick look at the mailing list archives for the previous two >> months. I only saw one message from someone who is from China or Japan. >>=20 >> The IETF had a meeting in China and in Japan. There are RFC authors >> from China and Japan. There is an IAB member from China. I would >> expect people from these two countries and other countries to express >> their opinions about the issues being discussed. What is visible is >> that participants from the United States dominate the discussions. A >> better description would be that people from the United States have been >> participating in the IETF since a long time and it is normal for people >> from the United States to control the discussions or rule it by superior >> authority. >>=20 >> The question I would ask is whether people who have been participating >> in IETF discussions since a long time make allowances for someone who >> has not been participating in such discussions. >>=20 >> Regards, >> -sm >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> diversity mailing list >> diversity@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity >=20 From stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie Mon Jun 17 00:48:02 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 EF3A221F9AE6 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 00:48:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.38 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.38 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_52=0.6, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, 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 tpaAdBpAYHUS for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 00:47:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E42C21F9AB0 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 00:47:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CBF1BE55; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:46:33 +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 Q-a0IN+4vfcM; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:46:32 +0100 (IST) Received: from [172.17.182.247] (unknown [147.67.241.226]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A6B57BE53; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:46:31 +0100 (IST) Message-ID: <51BEBED6.5090909@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:46:30 +0100 From: Stephen Farrell User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Moriarty, Kathleen" References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> In-Reply-To: <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: SM , Arturo Servin , "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 07:48:07 -0000 This answer is maybe a bit specific, but in a case like that it can be easier (I imagine) to get involved in newer related work, e.g. perhaps wpkops. New WGs tend to take volunteers who turn up doing good stuff more readily since there're new documents and fewer old arguments. S. On 06/17/2013 08:37 AM, Moriarty, Kathleen wrote: > I am at a conference in Bangkok and had an interesting conversation last night at the social. My talk tomorrow includes the MILE work. When I mentioned this someone commented that he really likes the IETF and has followed mailing lists like PKIX for years, but never participates. His initial plan was to monitor for a month, then become active. He kept saying in 2 more months, then just figured everyone else was smarter than him, so monitoring was better. I filled him in more on the culture and that even very smart people are not always right, even if they assert their answers as if they are. > > The next issue he brought up was conflicts on lists. It is not in his culture to engage in conflict, so he continues to monitor. Interestingly, he was very positive on the IETF work as a venue to get things done and of the work that happens. I'm still thinking about this one because he was so positive. > > Thank you, > Kathleen > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jun 17, 2013, at 1:31 PM, "Arturo Servin" wrote: > >> >> Or that they have more time to discuss ... >> >> :) >> >> I guess is that they have more time in the ietf, I found the discussion >> interesting but I felt that I didn't have many things to add, so I just >> silently followed it. >> >> regards, >> as >> >> On 6/17/13 12:17 AM, SM wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> The meaning of "making allowances for someone" is to allow someone to >>> behave in a way that you would not usually accept, because of a problem >>> or because there is a special reason. >>> >>> Last week there were several messages on the ietf@ mailing list about >>> "Content-free Last Call comments". Most of the people who posted on the >>> thread usually participate in discussions on the ietf@ mailing list. I >>> took a quick look at the mailing list archives for the previous two >>> months. I only saw one message from someone who is from China or Japan. >>> >>> The IETF had a meeting in China and in Japan. There are RFC authors >>> from China and Japan. There is an IAB member from China. I would >>> expect people from these two countries and other countries to express >>> their opinions about the issues being discussed. What is visible is >>> that participants from the United States dominate the discussions. A >>> better description would be that people from the United States have been >>> participating in the IETF since a long time and it is normal for people >>> from the United States to control the discussions or rule it by superior >>> authority. >>> >>> The question I would ask is whether people who have been participating >>> in IETF discussions since a long time make allowances for someone who >>> has not been participating in such discussions. >>> >>> Regards, >>> -sm >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> diversity mailing list >>> diversity@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity >> _______________________________________________ >> diversity mailing list >> diversity@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity >> > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > > From sm@resistor.net Mon Jun 17 01:05:32 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 702F421F85EB for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 01:05:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.503 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.503 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.096, 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 958LwxDokTWN for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 01:05:27 -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 1E47B21F9A1B for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 01:05:10 -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 r5H854th020710; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 01:05:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371456308; bh=SADd77RrGYkgLa011XjxvB3ykKXWaYtpvd3u0PkJKxQ=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=kakYA3BJNdTdvbtURA5pvC3Hx7dOYCrBkeFcEjtjK5S6CNNsWVU/qixfT3o3WTW+d L3PJe9U6bEAJ7pWaY/LC0qtwSLBGn0IWYclVQV2NQQsgVVwURAapJ1LCMfNTtBWXOl izlJgOxYnv9ydta5rZ7Bg57t2Vo4a7nA/tWQxtD4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371456308; i=@resistor.net; bh=SADd77RrGYkgLa011XjxvB3ykKXWaYtpvd3u0PkJKxQ=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=esWrRTElzqgdQ8YxbUKwIgUI3wKU+yZGCFC/UVzaap6/o8V0bbXMB+e7dnbWj/rGS W7QuH4miihZ4CloE/ozRGjpCQoeZF4LS+VdOppMzZz1a6EUaP3wtKjia18fGYdllkx izbMTUiEy5u16rgsYgiltqdGMSTM5Bb8OuHIDjjU= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130617001054.06bddb48@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 00:45:12 -0700 To: Abdussalam Baryun From: SM In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:05:32 -0000 Hi Abdussalam, At 12:19 16-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >one has the authority to *not allow participation*. People from Japan >or China, may not participate but I think they are listening and some >day they will participate (maybe when all get to respect all), and >when they do, the discussions will be interesting. IMHO, they/I don't >need allowance from any one but they/I need more opportunity/awareness >in Japan and China, that the IETF is not ruled by one region but all >regions equally depending on participation. I read your comment as meaning that there isn't any reason to make allowances for someone who is in China. Let's assume the following case: there is someone who was from China and who is now in U.K. Is there a special reason to make allowances for that person? I read your comment as meaning that there isn't any special reason to do that. By the way nobody suggested having authority to not allow participation. I don't understand the part in the above about "they need more opportunity/awareness in Japan and China". Regards, -sm From arturo.servin@gmail.com Mon Jun 17 01:06:20 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 7913E21F9798 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 01:06:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_52=0.6] 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 UVrfHRGv7gDw for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 01:06:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pd0-f170.google.com (mail-pd0-f170.google.com [209.85.192.170]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D13C21F93E0 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 01:06:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pd0-f170.google.com with SMTP id x11so2524996pdj.1 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 01:06:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BCgkfhNuub06vjicZ8NwxiQvBSLqSM9ggGbJfQPDqAA=; b=V6YXTG+6OAb7Ir9fCekv/Jx8y1auQmaLY0kRJYBZ23L72dH5bqnqXRMfDYZzSwCz64 EeupN7Eiphd11421AyiaRZKgBoFHA/4T9yc8hXy7mmlmdQEV8SPBfUmit3wz6afRtO64 WUMZQhKbbqPvgg027DmA0jOzP/iOoVAPkBU9+3oU0XObrQG71JVHtNvCumsxaJP91Jjl Apjd0szvOEi9wcryLdedpxNCEYtyUHSIsVcHDupdSJbyzct7W4GWeIA7pzD15OT4A6ci iXlvzrLPwAk9IKKRea3JangVJ9gX+cyhoFadZ8vao5LnBi+2+N4Avru3KoVW8XxWU9+d pjyw== X-Received: by 10.66.191.99 with SMTP id gx3mr11915182pac.88.1371456367292; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 01:06:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Arturos-MacBook-Pro.local (110-170-171-184.static.asianet.co.th. [110.170.171.184]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id qp4sm12880331pbc.41.2013.06.17.01.06.04 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 01:06:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51BEC36A.9060505@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 15:06:02 +0700 From: Arturo Servin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Farrell References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <51BEBED6.5090909@cs.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: <51BEBED6.5090909@cs.tcd.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: SM , "Moriarty, Kathleen" , "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:06:20 -0000 At least for me it has been much more difficult to participate in well incorporated WGs (sidr, v6ops) than in new ones (weirds). One if the natural barrier to participate in the IETF, the other is to catch up with older WG participants. Perhaps something that we need to pursuit is to promote new WGs with the new people arriving to the ietf where it may be easier to participate. Regards, as On 6/17/13 2:46 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > This answer is maybe a bit specific, but in a case like that it can > be easier (I imagine) to get involved in newer related work, e.g. > perhaps wpkops. New WGs tend to take volunteers who turn up doing > good stuff more readily since there're new documents and fewer > old arguments. > > S. > > On 06/17/2013 08:37 AM, Moriarty, Kathleen wrote: >> I am at a conference in Bangkok and had an interesting conversation last night at the social. My talk tomorrow includes the MILE work. When I mentioned this someone commented that he really likes the IETF and has followed mailing lists like PKIX for years, but never participates. His initial plan was to monitor for a month, then become active. He kept saying in 2 more months, then just figured everyone else was smarter than him, so monitoring was better. I filled him in more on the culture and that even very smart people are not always right, even if they assert their answers as if they are. >> >> The next issue he brought up was conflicts on lists. It is not in his culture to engage in conflict, so he continues to monitor. Interestingly, he was very positive on the IETF work as a venue to get things done and of the work that happens. I'm still thinking about this one because he was so positive. >> >> Thank you, >> Kathleen >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Jun 17, 2013, at 1:31 PM, "Arturo Servin" wrote: >> >>> >>> Or that they have more time to discuss ... >>> >>> :) >>> >>> I guess is that they have more time in the ietf, I found the discussion >>> interesting but I felt that I didn't have many things to add, so I just >>> silently followed it. >>> >>> regards, >>> as >>> >>> On 6/17/13 12:17 AM, SM wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> The meaning of "making allowances for someone" is to allow someone to >>>> behave in a way that you would not usually accept, because of a problem >>>> or because there is a special reason. >>>> >>>> Last week there were several messages on the ietf@ mailing list about >>>> "Content-free Last Call comments". Most of the people who posted on the >>>> thread usually participate in discussions on the ietf@ mailing list. I >>>> took a quick look at the mailing list archives for the previous two >>>> months. I only saw one message from someone who is from China or Japan. >>>> >>>> The IETF had a meeting in China and in Japan. There are RFC authors >>>> from China and Japan. There is an IAB member from China. I would >>>> expect people from these two countries and other countries to express >>>> their opinions about the issues being discussed. What is visible is >>>> that participants from the United States dominate the discussions. A >>>> better description would be that people from the United States have been >>>> participating in the IETF since a long time and it is normal for people >>>> from the United States to control the discussions or rule it by superior >>>> authority. >>>> >>>> The question I would ask is whether people who have been participating >>>> in IETF discussions since a long time make allowances for someone who >>>> has not been participating in such discussions. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> -sm >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> diversity mailing list >>>> diversity@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity >>> _______________________________________________ >>> diversity mailing list >>> diversity@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> diversity mailing list >> diversity@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity >> >> From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Mon Jun 17 03:13:43 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 E57A421F965B for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:13:41 -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=[AWL=-0.000, 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 qTeZn04gTcTD for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:13:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-x22c.google.com (mail-pb0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBF6321F8CDD for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:10:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pb0-f44.google.com with SMTP id uo1so2625978pbc.3 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:10:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=3oyLtdRi2Dqj2RcPwKuWP9IVnowCBU4oi2qrmW0vcPY=; b=j1E94FOf8Z4BKnGgEicloo6KIH7LHzURsbC87V9SultiWDfZzKn+pFUwLeORIA+ksd fQfp1DocUcZPyxxeGIApJ4bVLefNRtXha7pjVRpqBm+D35HzS2v3kzjwv9lTO3i915zm YXl/YZrixIdHyIZkp7k8yL1iLi/Bba0e4kbxU5n6KN1UqkBOzrgCtMR4nZ3Zm4OfPwUs HxoSOG4R106SYJ/I6aAzlgvhjmQxjzHKB/kIq68XfTXc4dVchzk6xfojFxnyZDA7HpuR hj+FJkgjCJ+O9FXX59qrqsScT/rLuD2rPk5r/25TFf+qJHzTYBicWb8dazFyEfSPKZO3 EpqA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.68.103.194 with SMTP id fy2mr12216519pbb.158.1371463802834; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:10:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:10:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130617001054.06bddb48@resistor.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617001054.06bddb48@resistor.net> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 11:10:02 +0100 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: SM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d63ceca5efc04df56cc6d Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:13:44 -0000 --047d7b5d63ceca5efc04df56cc6d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 8:45 AM, SM wrote: > Hi Abdussalam, > > At 12:19 16-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: > >> one has the authority to *not allow participation*. People from Japan >> or China, may not participate but I think they are listening and some >> day they will participate (maybe when all get to respect all), and >> when they do, the discussions will be interesting. IMHO, they/I don't >> need allowance from any one but they/I need more opportunity/awareness >> in Japan and China, that the IETF is not ruled by one region but all >> regions equally depending on participation. >> > > I read your comment as meaning that there isn't any reason to make > allowances for someone who is in China. > I don't mean we don't allow. There are all reasons to make allowance to someone and everyone from all countries, not only china. > > Let's assume the following case: there is someone who was from China and > who is now in U.K. Is there a special reason to make allowances for that > person? I read your comment as meaning that there isn't any special reason > to do that. > The allowance is already used in IETF, all are allowed, any where and any country, why you think/assume someone needs allowance. Did you ask someone from thoes countries and he/she said they have no allowance? > > By the way nobody suggested having authority to not allow participation. > I don't understand the part in the above about "they need more > opportunity/awareness in Japan and China". > You did not suggest but assumed no allowance. When you ask for allowance for someone, that means that that someone feels that he/she has no allowance, or that you beleive (not only assume) that allowance is not given already in IETF. Regarding opportunity needed, I don't think IETF meetings or its interaction with its community are providing with equal opportunity to all regions, also I assume that IETF management are not attracting other regions to participate (because they did not report efforts, which I can see). I beleive marketing of IETF is with low performance in China and Japan. Regards AB > > Regards, > -sm > --047d7b5d63ceca5efc04df56cc6d Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On M= on, Jun 17, 2013 at 8:45 AM, SM <sm@resistor.net> wrote:
Hi Abdussalam,

At 12:19 16-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
one has the authority to *not allow participation*. People from Japan
or China, may not participate but I think they are listening and some
day they will participate (maybe when all get to respect all), and
when they do, the discussions will be interesting. IMHO, they/I don't need allowance from any one but they/I need more opportunity/awareness
in Japan and China, that the IETF is not ruled by one region but all
regions equally depending on participation.

I read your comment as meaning that there isn't any reason to make allo= wances for someone who is in China.
=A0
I do= n't mean we don't allow. There are all reasons to make allowance to= someone and everyone from all countries, not only china.=A0
=A0

Let's assume the following case: there is someone who was from China an= d who is now in U.K. =A0Is there a special reason to make allowances for th= at person? =A0I read your comment as meaning that there isn't any speci= al reason to do that.
=A0
The=A0allowance is already used in IETF, al= l are allowed, any where and any country, why you think/assume someone need= s allowance. Did you ask someone from thoes countries and he/she said they = have no allowance?

By the way nobody suggested having authority to not allow participation. = =A0I don't understand the part in the above about "they need more = opportunity/awareness in Japan and China".
=A0
You did not suggest but assumed no allowance. When you ask for allowan= ce for someone, that means that that someone feels that he/she has no allow= ance, or that you=A0beleive (not only assume) that allowance is not given a= lready in IETF.
=A0
Regarding opportunity needed, I don't think IETF mee= tings or its interaction with its community=A0are providing with equal oppo= rtunity to all regions, also I assume=A0that IETF=A0management are not attr= acting other regions to participate (because they did not report efforts, w= hich I can see). I beleive marketing of IETF is with low performance in Chi= na and Japan.
=A0
Regards
AB

Regards,
-sm

--047d7b5d63ceca5efc04df56cc6d-- From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Mon Jun 17 03:15:50 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 829C321F9B89 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:15:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_52=0.6, 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 CrkWgi-qNoFS for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:15:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pa0-x22f.google.com (mail-pa0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0BB621F9B53 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:15:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id kl14so2690108pab.6 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:15:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Zp74wk8YvB36cCjSe4KyAnjRiJHEO1P9A/X3UxwN314=; b=KM20Sn0oBwq2hgrnW5Cu6yjSqGDc8XcJxlXor43fG3C65qyFklp58JG/rI9wa8B9uo 3VtBpJOjI5netjRNH6i8XfavI0jsLa+i+sZnHIh1kxHQmDDczvsZ1h5IdEn9+nhojcHF rP7iEkb1WcK2a74NqyRoSujX95IIIppUQloCMz7bMu2Hs9H2WZnpqVA9j2AenvvXEdI1 W4bZBm4EKrSrZBrCVu3lX3km9fXsQKpz5I4rj7PseS6BzrzO2wlQ/Cy+xtgCpJoswe6R QbQsDOTr6VXnX1+CF1xK/4cHik73/Mriy7p9jd0uMZ59q7YUqwp3qMh7KGoNT8pEyKNH EnLg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.68.52.10 with SMTP id p10mr12393985pbo.92.1371464104689; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:15:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:15:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51BEC36A.9060505@gmail.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <51BEBED6.5090909@cs.tcd.ie> <51BEC36A.9060505@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 11:15:04 +0100 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: Arturo Servin Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec54307a0c8479704df56de7e Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , SM , "Moriarty, Kathleen" , Stephen Farrell Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:15:53 -0000 --bcaec54307a0c8479704df56de7e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi AS, I think that you are right. Also will add that we need new WG chairs, I don't know why we don't get Chairs of WGs from all regions. So I suggest for each WG, we need at least 4 Chairs. I think that if we get WG Chairs from each region participation will no doubt increase. AB On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Arturo Servin wrote: > > At least for me it has been much more difficult to participate in > well > incorporated WGs (sidr, v6ops) than in new ones (weirds). One if the > natural barrier to participate in the IETF, the other is to catch up > with older WG participants. > > Perhaps something that we need to pursuit is to promote new WGs > with > the new people arriving to the ietf where it may be easier to participate. > > Regards, > as > > On 6/17/13 2:46 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > > > This answer is maybe a bit specific, but in a case like that it can > > be easier (I imagine) to get involved in newer related work, e.g. > > perhaps wpkops. New WGs tend to take volunteers who turn up doing > > good stuff more readily since there're new documents and fewer > > old arguments. > > > > S. > > > > On 06/17/2013 08:37 AM, Moriarty, Kathleen wrote: > >> I am at a conference in Bangkok and had an interesting conversation > last night at the social. My talk tomorrow includes the MILE work. When I > mentioned this someone commented that he really likes the IETF and has > followed mailing lists like PKIX for years, but never participates. His > initial plan was to monitor for a month, then become active. He kept > saying in 2 more months, then just figured everyone else was smarter than > him, so monitoring was better. I filled him in more on the culture and > that even very smart people are not always right, even if they assert their > answers as if they are. > >> > >> The next issue he brought up was conflicts on lists. It is not in his > culture to engage in conflict, so he continues to monitor. Interestingly, > he was very positive on the IETF work as a venue to get things done and of > the work that happens. I'm still thinking about this one because he was so > positive. > >> > >> Thank you, > >> Kathleen > >> > >> Sent from my iPhone > >> > >> On Jun 17, 2013, at 1:31 PM, "Arturo Servin" > wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> Or that they have more time to discuss ... > >>> > >>> :) > >>> > >>> I guess is that they have more time in the ietf, I found the > discussion > >>> interesting but I felt that I didn't have many things to add, so I just > >>> silently followed it. > >>> > >>> regards, > >>> as > >>> > >>> On 6/17/13 12:17 AM, SM wrote: > >>>> Hello, > >>>> > >>>> The meaning of "making allowances for someone" is to allow someone to > >>>> behave in a way that you would not usually accept, because of a > problem > >>>> or because there is a special reason. > >>>> > >>>> Last week there were several messages on the ietf@ mailing list about > >>>> "Content-free Last Call comments". Most of the people who posted on > the > >>>> thread usually participate in discussions on the ietf@ mailing list. > I > >>>> took a quick look at the mailing list archives for the previous two > >>>> months. I only saw one message from someone who is from China or > Japan. > >>>> > >>>> The IETF had a meeting in China and in Japan. There are RFC authors > >>>> from China and Japan. There is an IAB member from China. I would > >>>> expect people from these two countries and other countries to express > >>>> their opinions about the issues being discussed. What is visible is > >>>> that participants from the United States dominate the discussions. A > >>>> better description would be that people from the United States have > been > >>>> participating in the IETF since a long time and it is normal for > people > >>>> from the United States to control the discussions or rule it by > superior > >>>> authority. > >>>> > >>>> The question I would ask is whether people who have been participating > >>>> in IETF discussions since a long time make allowances for someone who > >>>> has not been participating in such discussions. > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> -sm > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> diversity mailing list > >>>> diversity@ietf.org > >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> diversity mailing list > >>> diversity@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> diversity mailing list > >> diversity@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > --bcaec54307a0c8479704df56de7e Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi AS,
=A0
I think that you are r= ight. Also will add that we need new WG chairs, I don't know why we don= 't get=A0Chairs of WGs from all regions. So I suggest for each WG, we n= eed=A0at least 4 Chairs. I think that if we get WG Chairs from each region = participation will no doubt increase.
=A0
AB


On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Arturo Servin <= arturo.servin@gmail.com> wrote:

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 At least for me it has been much more difficult to particip= ate in well
incorporated WGs (sidr, v6ops) than in new ones (weirds). One if the
natural barrier to participate in the IETF, the other is to catch up
with older WG participants.

=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Perhaps something that we need to pursuit is to promote new= WGs with
the new people arriving to the ietf where it may be easier to participate.<= br>
Regards,
as

On 6/17/13 2:46 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>
> This answer is maybe a bit specific, but in a case like that it can > be easier (I imagine) to get involved in newer related work, e.g.
> perhaps wpkops. New WGs tend to take volunteers who turn up doing
> good stuff more readily since there're new documents and fewer
> old arguments.
>
> S.
>
> On 06/17/2013 08:37 AM, Moriarty, Kathleen wrote:
>> I am at a conference in Bangkok and had an interesting conversatio= n last night at the social. =A0My talk tomorrow includes the MILE work. =A0= When I mentioned this someone commented that he really likes the IETF and h= as followed mailing lists like PKIX for years, but never participates. =A0H= is initial plan was to monitor for a month, then become active. =A0He kept = saying in 2 more months, then just figured everyone else was smarter than h= im, so monitoring was better. =A0I filled him in more on the culture and th= at even very smart people are not always right, even if they assert their a= nswers as if they are.
>>
>> The next issue he brought up was conflicts on lists. =A0It is not = in his culture to engage in conflict, so he continues to monitor. =A0Intere= stingly, he was very positive on the IETF work as a venue to get things don= e and of the work that happens. =A0I'm still thinking about this one be= cause he was so positive.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Kathleen
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Jun 17, 2013, at 1:31 PM, "Arturo Servin" <arturo.servin@gmail.com> wrote:<= br> >>
>>>
>>> =A0 =A0Or that they have more time to discuss ...
>>>
>>> =A0 =A0:)
>>>
>>> =A0 =A0I guess is that they have more time in the ietf, I foun= d the discussion
>>> interesting but I felt that I didn't have many things to a= dd, so I just
>>> silently followed it.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>> as
>>>
>>> On 6/17/13 12:17 AM, SM wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> The meaning of "making allowances for someone" i= s to allow someone to
>>>> behave in a way that you would not usually accept, because= of a problem
>>>> or because there is a special reason.
>>>>
>>>> Last week there were several messages on the ietf@ mailing= list about
>>>> "Content-free Last Call comments". =A0Most of th= e people who posted on the
>>>> thread usually participate in discussions on the ietf@ mai= ling list. =A0I
>>>> took a quick look at the mailing list archives for the pre= vious two
>>>> months. =A0I only saw one message from someone who is from= China or Japan.
>>>>
>>>> The IETF had a meeting in China and in Japan. =A0There are= RFC authors
>>>> from China and Japan. =A0There is an IAB member from China= . =A0I would
>>>> expect people from these two countries and other countries= to express
>>>> their opinions about the issues being discussed. =A0What i= s visible is
>>>> that participants from the United States dominate the disc= ussions. =A0A
>>>> better description would be that people from the United St= ates have been
>>>> participating in the IETF since a long time and it is norm= al for people
>>>> from the United States to control the discussions or rule = it by superior
>>>> authority.
>>>>
>>>> The question I would ask is whether people who have been p= articipating
>>>> in IETF discussions since a long time make allowances for = someone who
>>>> has not been participating in such discussions.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> -sm
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> diversity mailing list
>>>> diversity@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> diversity mailing list
>>> diversity@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> diversity mailing list
>> diversity@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity

--bcaec54307a0c8479704df56de7e-- From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Mon Jun 17 03:23:35 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 2695421F9BE5 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:23:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.281 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.281 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.282, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_52=0.6, 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 cJpzUbhEQhY1 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:23:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pa0-x229.google.com (mail-pa0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B0B021F9BC3 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:23:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id bj3so2734708pad.28 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:23:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=pBKGKUgWN8JIS9iZFJNxTIPFohZhDPBSU3efV79wFOI=; b=BWgFJpYs8KUhvLEEp5qdG64I+tj18gdRlYlHmra/PNaVEK34GqZIpg6kSzh3f8i7gQ ByA4ZbNWgZxX128miwh6OrHP72cD4u2u/eXVRusD96vhe8XkHbCd0ib5vdgLSBlAWpkY dPY/1w4HArvqzbzmpOWHSPTZHBN1Rpu0Fa7pdfKkwaeeDBJ9NM5ZH0HSjHChnncMVPTp jV5NlrQQ5GnfR3QbsiIA4pBhRD981zvDjPpU0KWHs1Ajsexzj0SepbQlfTKx9Exd2Nh9 1YWDy+bBK07jXyfDetg8D99MeFv1deqKjCHeZKUV6OtIv/E/ABs9WgU27DMbWxSStTBJ WLlg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.68.52.10 with SMTP id p10mr12421457pbo.92.1371464589868; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:23:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:23:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51BEBED6.5090909@cs.tcd.ie> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <51BEBED6.5090909@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 11:23:09 +0100 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: Stephen Farrell Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec54307a0b3859004df56fb0c Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , SM , "Moriarty, Kathleen" , Arturo Servin Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:23:36 -0000 --bcaec54307a0b3859004df56fb0c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Why we need new WGs, why not making our OLD WGs newer with new participants. I experience that old participants don't give chance to new participants and the WG chair just watches with no interfer, the Chair will say ok lets see consensus which is wrong. If the new participants realise that the power is only consensus they will bring with them 100 new participant to rule the WG, which I don't think is a good solution for the IETF. We need All WGs to become new and able to work with the world and following the IETF to welcome/encourage (not only allow) new workers. AB On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > This answer is maybe a bit specific, but in a case like that it can > be easier (I imagine) to get involved in newer related work, e.g. > perhaps wpkops. New WGs tend to take volunteers who turn up doing > good stuff more readily since there're new documents and fewer > old arguments. > > S. > > On 06/17/2013 08:37 AM, Moriarty, Kathleen wrote: > > I am at a conference in Bangkok and had an interesting conversation last > night at the social. My talk tomorrow includes the MILE work. When I > mentioned this someone commented that he really likes the IETF and has > followed mailing lists like PKIX for years, but never participates. His > initial plan was to monitor for a month, then become active. He kept > saying in 2 more months, then just figured everyone else was smarter than > him, so monitoring was better. I filled him in more on the culture and > that even very smart people are not always right, even if they assert their > answers as if they are. > > > > The next issue he brought up was conflicts on lists. It is not in his > culture to engage in conflict, so he continues to monitor. Interestingly, > he was very positive on the IETF work as a venue to get things done and of > the work that happens. I'm still thinking about this one because he was so > positive. > > > > Thank you, > > Kathleen > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > On Jun 17, 2013, at 1:31 PM, "Arturo Servin" > wrote: > > > >> > >> Or that they have more time to discuss ... > >> > >> :) > >> > >> I guess is that they have more time in the ietf, I found the > discussion > >> interesting but I felt that I didn't have many things to add, so I just > >> silently followed it. > >> > >> regards, > >> as > >> > >> On 6/17/13 12:17 AM, SM wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> The meaning of "making allowances for someone" is to allow someone to > >>> behave in a way that you would not usually accept, because of a problem > >>> or because there is a special reason. > >>> > >>> Last week there were several messages on the ietf@ mailing list about > >>> "Content-free Last Call comments". Most of the people who posted on > the > >>> thread usually participate in discussions on the ietf@ mailing list. > I > >>> took a quick look at the mailing list archives for the previous two > >>> months. I only saw one message from someone who is from China or > Japan. > >>> > >>> The IETF had a meeting in China and in Japan. There are RFC authors > >>> from China and Japan. There is an IAB member from China. I would > >>> expect people from these two countries and other countries to express > >>> their opinions about the issues being discussed. What is visible is > >>> that participants from the United States dominate the discussions. A > >>> better description would be that people from the United States have > been > >>> participating in the IETF since a long time and it is normal for people > >>> from the United States to control the discussions or rule it by > superior > >>> authority. > >>> > >>> The question I would ask is whether people who have been participating > >>> in IETF discussions since a long time make allowances for someone who > >>> has not been participating in such discussions. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> -sm > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> diversity mailing list > >>> diversity@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > >> _______________________________________________ > >> diversity mailing list > >> diversity@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > diversity mailing list > > diversity@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > > > > > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > --bcaec54307a0b3859004df56fb0c Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Why we need new WGs, why not making our OLD WGs newer= with new participants. I experience that old participants don't give c= hance to new participants and the WG chair just watches with no interfer, t= he Chair will say ok lets see consensus which is wrong. If the new particip= ants realise that the power is only consensus they will bring with them 100= new participant to rule the WG, which I don't think is a good solution= for the IETF. We need All WGs to become new and able to work with the worl= d=A0and following the IETF to welcome/encourage (not only allow) new worker= s.
=A0
AB


On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:

This answer is maybe a bit specific, but in a case like that it can
be easier (I imagine) to get involved in newer related work, e.g.
perhaps wpkops. New WGs tend to take volunteers who turn up doing
good stuff more readily since there're new documents and fewer
old arguments.

S.

On 06/17/2013 08:37 AM, Moriarty, Kathleen wrote:
> I am at a conference in Bangkok and had an interesting conversation la= st night at the social. =A0My talk tomorrow includes the MILE work. =A0When= I mentioned this someone commented that he really likes the IETF and has f= ollowed mailing lists like PKIX for years, but never participates. =A0His i= nitial plan was to monitor for a month, then become active. =A0He kept sayi= ng in 2 more months, then just figured everyone else was smarter than him, = so monitoring was better. =A0I filled him in more on the culture and that e= ven very smart people are not always right, even if they assert their answe= rs as if they are.
>
> The next issue he brought up was conflicts on lists. =A0It is not in h= is culture to engage in conflict, so he continues to monitor. =A0Interestin= gly, he was very positive on the IETF work as a venue to get things done an= d of the work that happens. =A0I'm still thinking about this one becaus= e he was so positive.
>
> Thank you,
> Kathleen
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jun 17, 2013, at 1:31 PM, "Arturo Servin" <arturo.servin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> =A0 =A0Or that they have more time to discuss ...
>>
>> =A0 =A0:)
>>
>> =A0 =A0I guess is that they have more time in the ietf, I found th= e discussion
>> interesting but I felt that I didn't have many things to add, = so I just
>> silently followed it.
>>
>> regards,
>> as
>>
>> On 6/17/13 12:17 AM, SM wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> The meaning of "making allowances for someone" is to= allow someone to
>>> behave in a way that you would not usually accept, because of = a problem
>>> or because there is a special reason.
>>>
>>> Last week there were several messages on the ietf@ mailing lis= t about
>>> "Content-free Last Call comments". =A0Most of the pe= ople who posted on the
>>> thread usually participate in discussions on the ietf@ mailing= list. =A0I
>>> took a quick look at the mailing list archives for the previou= s two
>>> months. =A0I only saw one message from someone who is from Chi= na or Japan.
>>>
>>> The IETF had a meeting in China and in Japan. =A0There are RFC= authors
>>> from China and Japan. =A0There is an IAB member from China. = =A0I would
>>> expect people from these two countries and other countries to = express
>>> their opinions about the issues being discussed. =A0What is vi= sible is
>>> that participants from the United States dominate the discussi= ons. =A0A
>>> better description would be that people from the United States= have been
>>> participating in the IETF since a long time and it is normal f= or people
>>> from the United States to control the discussions or rule it b= y superior
>>> authority.
>>>
>>> The question I would ask is whether people who have been parti= cipating
>>> in IETF discussions since a long time make allowances for some= one who
>>> has not been participating in such discussions.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> -sm
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> diversity mailing list
>>> diversity@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>> _______________________________________________
>> diversity mailing list
>> diversity@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>>
> _______________________________________________
> diversity mailing list
> diversity@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>
>
_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity

--bcaec54307a0b3859004df56fb0c-- From stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie Mon Jun 17 03:33:26 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 CE71321F9ADA for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:33:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.83 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.83 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, 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 mzg+rOV5TB+N for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:33:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEC7821F901F for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:33:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDFF1BE55; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 11:32:53 +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 Y0YgsDVj460r; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 11:32:53 +0100 (IST) Received: from [172.17.182.247] (unknown [147.67.241.226]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 67AF2BE5F; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 11:32:51 +0100 (IST) Message-ID: <51BEE5CD.2060903@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 11:32:45 +0100 From: Stephen Farrell User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Abdussalam Baryun References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <51BEBED6.5090909@cs.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , Arturo Servin , "Moriarty, Kathleen" , SM Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:33:26 -0000 On 06/17/2013 11:23 AM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: > I experience that old participants don't give chance to new > participants My experience is that good contributions are welcomed regardless. And useless ones are properly ignored once its clear that some participant's contributions are generally useless. Good contributions earlier in the lifecycle of a WG naturally tend to be more likely to result in a participant authoring documents etc. But the main thing is that people should concentrate on making good technical contributions. S. From bs7652@att.com Mon Jun 17 06:08:36 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 2100221F9C14 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:08:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 GSFOvcgpvnNn for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:08:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nbfkord-smmo06.seg.att.com (nbfkord-smmo06.seg.att.com [209.65.160.94]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFDD021F9B90 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:08:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unknown [144.160.20.145] (EHLO mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) by nbfkord-smmo06.seg.att.com(mxl_mta-6.15.0-1) over TLS secured channel with ESMTP id 24a0fb15.0.106826.00-424.294613.nbfkord-smmo06.seg.att.com (envelope-from ); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:08:21 +0000 (UTC) X-MXL-Hash: 51bf0a45260d05b8-1e242e9e9532b229be14425494217e3a731bc991 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 r5HD8GvD021517; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:08:16 -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 r5HD88W9021409 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:08:12 -0400 Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUB9A.ITServices.sbc.com (gaalpa1msghub9a.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.36.87]) by alpi133.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:07:53 GMT Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.36.69]) by GAALPA1MSGHUB9A.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.36.87]) with mapi id 14.02.0342.003; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:07:59 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: SM , "diversity@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone Thread-Index: AQHOarWq1jO47p1y406OZx+s1EHZCpk5thiAgAASl4CAABPSkA== Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:07:58 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> In-Reply-To: <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.70.241.196] 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=IYswrxWa c=1 sm=0 a=ZRNLZ4dFUbCvG8UMqPvVAA==:17 a] X-AnalysisOut: [=yNdmfSUiAUkA:10 a=YszFIZS5nsUA:10 a=ofMgfj31e3cA:10 a=BLc] X-AnalysisOut: [eEmwcHowA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=zQP7CpKOAAAA:8 a=XIqpo32R] X-AnalysisOut: [AAAA:8 a=HfIaCHorALgA:10 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8] X-AnalysisOut: [ a=6ylri8AbhJc_FKZunGYA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=lZB815dzVvQA] X-AnalysisOut: [:10 a=MSl-tDqOz04A:10] Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:08:36 -0000 Thanks SM for starting this discussion here. SM and I traded a few emails l= ate last week about why I thought the Japanese operators preferred to do wo= rk in ITU-T as opposed to IETF (there was a recent liaison from ITU-T regar= ding IPv6 security; IETF participants have roundly criticized the ITU-T dra= ft as being lacking). I mentioned that in my experience, organizations that have successfully got= ten Japanese participation have tended to encourage (through leadership exa= mple and coaching of other "regular" participants) a different style of com= munication with the Japanese. - make absolutely sure that no language is used that could be considered d= isrespectful towards the individual or the individual's employer (but it's = still ok to have strong technical disagreement) - use of -san honorific to indicate respect for the individual - more formal language and less slang (recognizing language barrier as wel= l as cultural differences) - where useful, mentoring to help them feel welcome and not isolated I also saw discussion on this thread about how difficult it can be for new = people to come into existing groups. I don't think the answer to this probl= em is to start new groups. I think the answer may be some mentoring of new = people. Perhaps it would be good if new people were asked if they would lik= e a mentor in the area they're trying to break into. This could especially = be offered to people who are from under-represented populations in IETF. Barbara > -----Original Message----- > From: diversity-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:diversity-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Moriarty, Kathleen > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 3:38 AM > To: Arturo Servin > Cc: SM; diversity@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone >=20 > I am at a conference in Bangkok and had an interesting conversation last > night at the social. My talk tomorrow includes the MILE work. When I > mentioned this someone commented that he really likes the IETF and has > followed mailing lists like PKIX for years, but never participates. His = initial > plan was to monitor for a month, then become active. He kept saying in 2 > more months, then just figured everyone else was smarter than him, so > monitoring was better. I filled him in more on the culture and that even= very > smart people are not always right, even if they assert their answers as i= f they > are. >=20 > The next issue he brought up was conflicts on lists. It is not in his cu= lture to > engage in conflict, so he continues to monitor. Interestingly, he was ve= ry > positive on the IETF work as a venue to get things done and of the work t= hat > happens. I'm still thinking about this one because he was so positive. >=20 > Thank you, > Kathleen >=20 > Sent from my iPhone >=20 > On Jun 17, 2013, at 1:31 PM, "Arturo Servin" > wrote: >=20 > > > > Or that they have more time to discuss ... > > > > :) > > > > I guess is that they have more time in the ietf, I found the > > discussion interesting but I felt that I didn't have many things to > > add, so I just silently followed it. > > > > regards, > > as > > > > On 6/17/13 12:17 AM, SM wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> The meaning of "making allowances for someone" is to allow someone to > >> behave in a way that you would not usually accept, because of a > >> problem or because there is a special reason. > >> > >> Last week there were several messages on the ietf@ mailing list about > >> "Content-free Last Call comments". Most of the people who posted on > >> the thread usually participate in discussions on the ietf@ mailing > >> list. I took a quick look at the mailing list archives for the > >> previous two months. I only saw one message from someone who is > from China or Japan. > >> > >> The IETF had a meeting in China and in Japan. There are RFC authors > >> from China and Japan. There is an IAB member from China. I would > >> expect people from these two countries and other countries to express > >> their opinions about the issues being discussed. What is visible is > >> that participants from the United States dominate the discussions. A > >> better description would be that people from the United States have > >> been participating in the IETF since a long time and it is normal for > >> people from the United States to control the discussions or rule it > >> by superior authority. > >> > >> The question I would ask is whether people who have been > >> participating in IETF discussions since a long time make allowances > >> for someone who has not been participating in such discussions. > >> > >> Regards, > >> -sm From spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com Mon Jun 17 06:12:09 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 EBC5621F9BD0 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:12:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.328 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.328 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.329, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_52=0.6] 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 dlODBtbknWGf for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:12:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ob0-x22f.google.com (mail-ob0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C10421F9B88 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:12:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ob0-f175.google.com with SMTP id xn12so3076998obc.20 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:12:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kFs2vCBrtoISZIwiJBKfFL5mfeLmz/UdKPcyFFXqMq0=; b=gbyPAo3tC8CprDcvMmItFpkLJYaRnd/KWXWPGufOpKumHOaauJ3uk/ZK4Cx7RWlQzo 3GbXJZKljHW9VbVax3kG6CJBz54wO9orKGOWPFdkmCwQM5ajOAnU67fU7nVRYhfSIZxl DOykYvV1G49c+3RWuHwlu+Vm2pvW4/Blo1l/4j0MfYFEailmTcvCGf+ZW9KRcn1TEnw6 1O4LVhIokG9z/q1U/N1WtF5c8cQKWKH7tUXgKTtGBGRlZwH0GHOkOHp3ePApDWHtYeSh HL7f4vLvEXEN/eov3WKVBG0tsrf0ftBf6NvHT6ToTQcR689Xx0hIZyJa+LNl5wPsJ0Md B5uw== X-Received: by 10.182.129.230 with SMTP id nz6mr8766526obb.49.1371474727828; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:12:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.77] (99-108-174-213.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net. [99.108.174.213]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id rs1sm9916883obb.12.2013.06.17.06.12.05 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:12:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51BF0B03.6060304@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:11:31 -0500 From: Spencer Dawkins User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arturo Servin References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <51BEBED6.5090909@cs.tcd.ie> <51BEC36A.9060505@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51BEC36A.9060505@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , SM , "Moriarty, Kathleen" , Stephen Farrell Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:12:09 -0000 For Stephen - it's not your imagination about being harder to contribute to established groups. I was with several new participants at IETF 63 in Paris. One of them was interested in a specific working group, but that working group was trying to reach the finish line and close down, and they had an approach they were comfortable with, that seemed to work. If you convinced them that the approach they'd chosen was massively broken, that would have been interesting, but the working group was trying to send their document to the IESG for approval, and no one wanted to reopen a fundamental discussion just because someone had a different idea. For Arturo - that's the way IETF working groups are supposed to work! Working groups are chartered with constrained deliverables and milestone dates, and they're expected to produce the deliverables and shut down. When that doesn't happen, we have many problems (not just new participant assimilation). So, I'm thinking that if WGs can complete their work without dragging on, the IETF would have more bandwidth to start new work, and that would make new participant assimilation more straightforward. To the extent that the IESG can help with that, it seems good that the IESG would do so. Spencer, speaking as an individual On 6/17/2013 3:06 AM, Arturo Servin wrote: > At least for me it has been much more difficult to participate in well > incorporated WGs (sidr, v6ops) than in new ones (weirds). One if the > natural barrier to participate in the IETF, the other is to catch up > with older WG participants. > > Perhaps something that we need to pursuit is to promote new WGs with > the new people arriving to the ietf where it may be easier to participate. > > Regards, > as > > On 6/17/13 2:46 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: >> This answer is maybe a bit specific, but in a case like that it can >> be easier (I imagine) to get involved in newer related work, e.g. >> perhaps wpkops. New WGs tend to take volunteers who turn up doing >> good stuff more readily since there're new documents and fewer >> old arguments. >> >> S. From spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com Mon Jun 17 06:19:35 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 0473121F9BA6 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:19:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.617 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.617 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.018, BAYES_00=-2.599] 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 Llpg0NXbPaLA for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:19:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ob0-x236.google.com (mail-ob0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66F5421F9AF8 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:19:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ob0-f182.google.com with SMTP id va7so3090060obc.41 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:19:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=r8fQD7FbXU5EM7dlBdHWRcAqi4tbYdMDoe84xkp3bqE=; b=vG6dVFU44g6yheAkwVrvhIrEqFyPZ0N4lEsBkJjvHchxqHvJNVZIk1mdUUHlfn1oZF vDyR7v85oJ9Kg3ICSfstM6oFbU8RX1i93/SVBAERufNCJRa+IoLE8HvzdOUW3MTwQJmE evAh79gL/KXhQKUOou9ndxIs5SY+ujoOYVhGRlJ3RTMW7cN2WYO/Y3O0vYTj0XM0VdQW dBKe7VbogATyf0VJbYqmgICAnzC37diL3ub1a8ERPKDC9iNbMZFqwIe9YTv6uDJmuImY nipCmYmzYjYrY+0PaNjF/rgoATV7vLWwQAAYUxlQTBqwWBK+QQe/ajwpnBxcb/SJA8wJ 1yGw== X-Received: by 10.182.129.101 with SMTP id nv5mr8649538obb.56.1371475173877; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:19:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.77] (99-108-174-213.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net. [99.108.174.213]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id w7sm16333967obx.9.2013.06.17.06.19.31 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:19:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:18:58 -0500 From: Spencer Dawkins User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "STARK, BARBARA H" References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: SM , "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:19:35 -0000 On 6/17/2013 8:07 AM, STARK, BARBARA H wrote: > I also saw discussion on this thread about how difficult it can be for new people to come into existing groups. I don't think the answer to this problem is to start new groups. I think the answer may be some mentoring of new people. Perhaps it would be good if new people were asked if they would like a mentor in the area they're trying to break into. This could especially be offered to people who are from under-represented populations in IETF. > > Barbara Barbara and I sent e-mail that crossed in flight, so I should say that I don't think starting new groups is THE answer for new participant assimilation, either. Even if that turns out to be useful, it's not sufficient. Spencer From arturo.servin@gmail.com Mon Jun 17 06:36:46 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 7ACA221F9B44 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:36:46 -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] 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 iVaq-m7OLWKN for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:36:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-x229.google.com (mail-pb0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D502C21F9BA9 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:36:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pb0-f41.google.com with SMTP id rp16so2807445pbb.28 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:36:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=XVNsD1od0j8un+iSnKE4x8wBbV5JxmQScskU8bgeDg8=; b=dp2ohRqJ2Iz/tAllFbnGtVpCK3phGPpCnV/rk53Kc1My9VAgNzPEOi3XDUTD4rBK8W mkSNRPDD+SbU5qP+/Ji5j1hVYNelJca0W3fcuJ6UI3yzW/pFVGpY9MpZv82q/cnSSe4T /ECiqFctVM/wXar2DUgnHm3WRk0TyC2wZ+EseAxTjj+bDssUIRNozZXFkcBJ3e/hfrYo mPPj0lgwP2bSWsHGPhDpjTw+FJvXM6trsls8s978dSQSZdHn03RuUleMLWJHtZczO+92 Uq36GPhzntxJrYR4tEuofYCGqieeAemAkRmRpOK5z765mfvOEVh9o4fxJvHzzGLAned2 umWw== X-Received: by 10.68.135.35 with SMTP id pp3mr13047043pbb.116.1371476203377; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:36:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Arturos-MacBook-Pro.local ([202.183.168.2]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fl2sm14928910pab.23.2013.06.17.06.36.40 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:36:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51BF10E6.5030301@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:36:38 +0700 From: Arturo Servin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: diversity@ietf.org References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:36:46 -0000 Spencer, Barbara. For the record, I didn't mean to create new WGs for new people. What I meant is that every time that we create a new WG we should promote that WG with new participants so they can start fresh with that WG. For example, to new people I tend to recommend to follow or participate in WG that are just starting, working on new milestones, chartering or re-chartering rather than WG that are closing work. Is it more clear? Regards, as On 6/17/13 8:18 PM, Spencer Dawkins wrote: > On 6/17/2013 8:07 AM, STARK, BARBARA H wrote: >> I also saw discussion on this thread about how difficult it can be for >> new people to come into existing groups. I don't think the answer to >> this problem is to start new groups. I think the answer may be some >> mentoring of new people. Perhaps it would be good if new people were >> asked if they would like a mentor in the area they're trying to break >> into. This could especially be offered to people who are from >> under-represented populations in IETF. >> >> Barbara > > Barbara and I sent e-mail that crossed in flight, so I should say that I > don't think starting new groups is THE answer for new participant > assimilation, either. Even if that turns out to be useful, it's not > sufficient. > > Spencer > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity From bs7652@att.com Mon Jun 17 07:07:56 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 EF22721F9CA3 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 07:07:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 GhQ1wxTlt+o4 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 07:07:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nbfkord-smmo06.seg.att.com (nbfkord-smmo06.seg.att.com [209.65.160.94]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E716C21F9C9D for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 07:07:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unknown [144.160.20.145] (EHLO nbfkord-smmo06.seg.att.com) by nbfkord-smmo06.seg.att.com(mxl_mta-6.15.0-1) with ESMTP id 4381fb15.2aaad2a10940.140250.00-551.390290.nbfkord-smmo06.seg.att.com (envelope-from ); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:07:48 +0000 (UTC) X-MXL-Hash: 51bf18342ea1a11b-961c69a07ecfed409a39deae15e01b6d74a7a13d Received: from unknown [144.160.20.145] (EHLO mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) by nbfkord-smmo06.seg.att.com(mxl_mta-6.15.0-1) over TLS secured channel with ESMTP id e281fb15.0.140169.00-414.390059.nbfkord-smmo06.seg.att.com (envelope-from ); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:07:44 +0000 (UTC) X-MXL-Hash: 51bf183045215d92-e853d9215da62e0df003a7161361aa6cb300626d 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 r5HE7glE006338; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:07:42 -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 r5HE7XZY006169 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:07:35 -0400 Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUB9A.ITServices.sbc.com (gaalpa1msghub9a.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.36.87]) by alpi133.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:07:23 GMT Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.36.69]) by GAALPA1MSGHUB9A.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.36.87]) with mapi id 14.02.0342.003; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:07:29 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: Spencer Dawkins Thread-Topic: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone Thread-Index: AQHOarWq1jO47p1y406OZx+s1EHZCpk5thiAgAASl4CAABPSkIAAS5QA///ADrA= Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:07:29 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.70.241.196] 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=IYswrxWa c=1 sm=0 a=ZRNLZ4dFUbCvG8UMqPvVAA==:17 a] X-AnalysisOut: [=yNdmfSUiAUkA:10 a=YszFIZS5nsUA:10 a=ofMgfj31e3cA:10 a=BLc] X-AnalysisOut: [eEmwcHowA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=zQP7CpKOAAAA:8 a=XIqpo32R] X-AnalysisOut: [AAAA:8 a=HfIaCHorALgA:10 a=HR-lVjXjBoitW7x9eLUA:9 a=CjuIK1] X-AnalysisOut: [q_8ugA:10] Cc: SM , "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:07:56 -0000 > > I also saw discussion on this thread about how difficult it can be for = new > people to come into existing groups. I don't think the answer to this pro= blem > is to start new groups. I think the answer may be some mentoring of new > people. Perhaps it would be good if new people were asked if they would > like a mentor in the area they're trying to break into. This could especi= ally be > offered to people who are from under-represented populations in IETF. > > > > Barbara >=20 > Barbara and I sent e-mail that crossed in flight, so I should say that I = don't > think starting new groups is THE answer for new participant assimilation, > either. Even if that turns out to be useful, it's not sufficient. >=20 > Spencer And I also agreed with what Spencer said. Which leads me to believe even mo= re strongly that mentoring may be a good approach. The Tao of IETF is good = but also a bit long and impersonal, and getting soundly rebuffed by a WG tr= ying to get deliverables out the door can be disheartening. But if there we= re someone to sit down with, one-on-one, who would listen to what the under= -represented-population newcomer was interested in, and could discuss the t= opic with them and guide them in how best to accomplish their goal (or conv= ince them tactfully that it might not be a good idea), they might decide to= stick around and persevere.=20 Barbara From bs7652@att.com Mon Jun 17 07:13:05 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 74A9D21F9C32 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 07:13:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 EpfRWI0ffp0L for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 07:12:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com (nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com [209.65.160.93]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68ACC21F9BD3 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 07:12:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unknown [144.160.20.145] (EHLO nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com) by nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com(mxl_mta-6.15.0-1) with ESMTP id a691fb15.2aaabd401940.129971.00-595.366128.nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com (envelope-from ); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:12:58 +0000 (UTC) X-MXL-Hash: 51bf196a64bf167f-23ab6fa36a69f5e667a70eff8006956e4ca7c971 Received: from unknown [144.160.20.145] (EHLO mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) by nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com(mxl_mta-6.15.0-1) over TLS secured channel with ESMTP id 9691fb15.0.129961.00-430.366099.nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com (envelope-from ); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:12:57 +0000 (UTC) X-MXL-Hash: 51bf196932cf0ac2-7b642df0df2f6137f5ec732a259bda3d719defee 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 r5HECuhq010846; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:12:57 -0400 Received: from alpi132.aldc.att.com (alpi132.aldc.att.com [130.8.217.2]) by mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r5HEClIj010727 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:12:52 -0400 Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUB9C.ITServices.sbc.com (gaalpa1msghub9c.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.36.89]) by alpi132.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:12:29 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; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 10:12:35 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: Arturo Servin , "diversity@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone Thread-Index: AQHOarWq1jO47p1y406OZx+s1EHZCpk5thiAgAASl4CAABPSkIAAS5QAgAAE8AD//8WX4A== Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:12:34 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0E07@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <51BF10E6.5030301@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51BF10E6.5030301@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.70.241.196] 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=W5CPo2qk c=1 sm=0 a=ZRNLZ4dFUbCvG8UMqPvVAA==:17 a] X-AnalysisOut: [=yNdmfSUiAUkA:10 a=YszFIZS5nsUA:10 a=ofMgfj31e3cA:10 a=BLc] X-AnalysisOut: [eEmwcHowA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=zQP7CpKOAAAA:8 a=XIqpo32R] X-AnalysisOut: [AAAA:8 a=HfIaCHorALgA:10 a=YspKjr5g9k_OuNQVMTMA:9 a=CjuIK1] X-AnalysisOut: [q_8ugA:10] Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:13:05 -0000 > For the record, I didn't mean to create new WGs for new people. > What I meant is that every time that we create a new WG we should > promote that WG with new participants so they can start fresh with that W= G. >=20 > For example, to new people I tend to recommend to follow or > participate in WG that are just starting, working on new milestones, > chartering or re-chartering rather than WG that are closing work. Hi Arturo, I think you bring up an interesting point. I wonder if there are ways to be= tter advertise the start of new efforts to let the outside world know about= them when they start. So the newcomers know to come. it might be useful to= more broadly liaise to other organizations when we start new efforts, and = come up with other ways to reach out at the start (like asking already-enga= ged people to send email and otherwise communicate with customers/vendors/o= thers who might also have an interest). Barbara From dhc@dcrocker.net Mon Jun 17 08:50:36 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 D615321F8EC3 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:50:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.507 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.507 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.092, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 AvbEyM73vzqj for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:50:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B48D721F91B7 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:50:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.66] (76-218-9-215.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.9.215]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r5HFoONv019395 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:50:27 -0700 Message-ID: <51BF3033.8090707@dcrocker.net> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:50:11 -0700 From: Dave Crocker Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Moriarty, Kathleen" References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> In-Reply-To: <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.66]); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 08:50:28 -0700 (PDT) Cc: SM , Arturo Servin , "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 15:50:37 -0000 On 6/17/2013 12:37 AM, Moriarty, Kathleen wrote: > I am at a conference in Bangkok and had an interesting conversation last night at the social. My talk tomorrow includes the MILE work. When I mentioned this someone commented that he really likes the IETF and has followed mailing lists like PKIX for years, but never participates. His initial plan was to monitor for a month, then become active. He kept saying in 2 more months, then just figured everyone else was smarter than him, so monitoring was better. I filled him in more on the culture and that even very smart people are not always right, even if they assert their answers as if they are. > > The next issue he brought up was conflicts on lists. It is not in his culture to engage in conflict, so he continues to monitor. Interestingly, he was very positive on the IETF work as a venue to get things done and of the work that happens. I'm still thinking about this one because he was so positive. Interesting example. It provides two points, one that they still think well of the IETF, and the other that they continue not to participate. For our purposes here, the latter seems the more significant to me. While there's always a danger in over-interpreting a single example, it could be worth carefully considering and researching what we need to do to get such folk to start contributing and feeling comfortable about it. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From sm@resistor.net Mon Jun 17 13:11:04 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 3C5C221F9CF2 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:11:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.088, 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 Pi0-b3m9fQtX for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:11:02 -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 4874E21F9CEE for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:11:02 -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 r5HKAq1D021030; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:10:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371499857; bh=zTjxwfww8k/B7OM1B4eOqvgtWRDSrvVVEGrkBUsVbjw=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=Zh1C2AUhtVZQ6WV/xfnOVNTGEhI1mqzTpmIye+SoqtatjTVYXyTEJBhApm32iN5oN 6VSu3M2Uz1z5srJxSb4Vj+JeSsTN9R4DU/UYKdmpjd1oOy9bn+uZZNmGN5YH4g6eTI b0j3AbZDHsNBBJfIiRpNH+iiL6URpn/EezQ8lZy8= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371499857; i=@resistor.net; bh=zTjxwfww8k/B7OM1B4eOqvgtWRDSrvVVEGrkBUsVbjw=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=YHvx3d/6gnHIQbwlgHzrLQUBcI/TWR3gP79q+YBDNz+6ZiVTNxYbvFy+r2GsranZn SHeScO5rb9J14dFwr8ugc6qxgkBO9a2VfANijTGw7yfc3NF7nBNRU/mM+bL3xsBjv4 AIIycFu3HcHOjuu8prQgOTjf+Jyb8F3tnFEr/xmw= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 12:44:01 -0700 To: diversity@ietf.org From: SM In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.I TServices.sbc.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: "STARK, BARBARA H" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:11:04 -0000 At 07:07 17-06-2013, STARK, BARBARA H wrote: >And I also agreed with what Spencer said. Which leads me to believe >even more strongly that mentoring may be a good approach. The Tao of >IETF is good but also a bit long and impersonal, and getting soundly >rebuffed by a WG trying to get deliverables out the door can be >disheartening. But if there were someone to sit down with, >one-on-one, who would listen to what the >under-represented-population newcomer was interested in, and could >discuss the topic with them and guide them in how best to accomplish >their goal (or convince them tactfully that it might not be a good >idea), they might decide to stick around and persevere. Thanks to Barbara for sharing her experience of organizations that have successfully attracted Japanese participation. I'll mention a story: At my second IETF meeting, I attended a number of sessions. At one point, I dropped in to observe one of the working groups. Someone (I don't recall whom, but I assumed at the time that it was the chair) ejected me from the room with the assertion "this working group is a closed group," and I forever since have had the irrational feeling that I am not welcome in that particular domain. The person, by the way, seemed as uncomfortable ejecting me as I felt being ejected. Had I been able to talk with the person earlier, learn the ground rules, and find out what was probably the truth, that only one session of that working group was going to be closed during the whole week, the incident could have been avoided. I changed a few words in the story. I should have asked the person who told the story whether I can post it. There is a reason why I consider the story as an interesting one. Kathleen mentioned the conflicts on the list as an issue. In my opinion people would be reluctant to participate if they are not used to participating in controversial discussions. As mentioned above (see quoted text) it is discouraging to have a group of people opposing your idea by mocking you. There was a message posted by someone from Japan: I cannot belive that I'm seeing this thread on an IETF list. I run a NOG, and we've been through this many times and we're alread over it. Don't call them 'newbies'. Don't think that having the chairs or whatevers talk to new comers on sunday mornings will make them happy and increase their involvement. It's all about PEER involvement. The attitude that the COMMUNITY has. Do you talk to your friends about IETF? Are you proud of it? Will you encourage your friends to come? Does it make sense to you? Is the community working towards a common goal? Most importantly, are we listening? or are we justing pretending to. Quoting Metallica "and nothing else matters" Regards, -sm From yding@cs.helsinki.fi Mon Jun 17 13:21:32 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 0102C21F9E08 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:21:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 6QMEhoP05mnN for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:21:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from courier.cs.helsinki.fi (courier.cs.helsinki.fi [128.214.9.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 630A521F9A05 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:21:27 -0700 (PDT) X-DKIM: Courier DKIM Filter v0.50+pk-2013-06-17 courier.cs.helsinki.fi Mon Jun 17 23:21:21 2013 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cs.helsinki.fi; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= dkim20130528; bh=s7h4aFo3ZUqOyMtRL5qEn59W1yCOPVCg7cYvYvtiwGI=; b= OmdvhfAQBu/zgpTUaGjpESwk4II44Dvddd3KaSBe41OD4NskerihDpkTCiVnXtgC y2uQTh9Wvcpx+50nqV8bsJ8c2x78d0ZztAO7CHY8U0JNhBfzueIYed7W8djTOmcB 05Lbkq+poH501o1Mwstla7Lhv3yDiqohaWsbCoRGQeo= Received: from [192.168.93.100] (host-94-101-2-100.igua.fi [94.101.2.100]) (AUTH: PLAIN yding, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by mail.cs.helsinki.fi with esmtp; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 23:21:21 +0300 id 00068A83.51BF6FC1.00003E32 Message-ID: <51BF6FC1.2010302@cs.helsinki.fi> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 23:21:21 +0300 From: Aaron Yi DING Organization: Helsinki University User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: SM References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net> In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: diversity@ietf.org, "STARK, BARBARA H" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:21:32 -0000 On 17/06/13 22:44, SM wrote: > > It's all about PEER involvement. > > The attitude that the COMMUNITY has. Do you talk to your friends > about IETF? > Are you proud of it? Will you encourage your friends to come? Does > it make > sense to you? Is the community working towards a common goal? > Most importantly, are we listening? or are we justing pretending to. > The last few ones are really sharp, and yet deserve our attention. >> Quoting Metallica "and nothing else matters" +1 Aaron > Regards, > -sm > > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity From yding@cs.helsinki.fi Mon Jun 17 14:34:31 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 9659B21F9E06 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:34:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 rnH6pg6oaAs6 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:34:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from courier.cs.helsinki.fi (courier.cs.helsinki.fi [128.214.9.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A3A221F9DF9 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:34:21 -0700 (PDT) X-DKIM: Courier DKIM Filter v0.50+pk-2013-06-17 courier.cs.helsinki.fi Tue Jun 18 00:33:49 2013 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cs.helsinki.fi; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= dkim20130528; bh=osySzreAR7TdRLfxkbJh3m2yBwbrylhExDLf+e3LFuk=; b= cdN/6/molDUUmfh3JSFSjVNDoJYuFfrG1mJdSAwHbl+xLznUEiCeeGS3YBqyXBLV 7LfJXKViRwD5qVhoqS4BkeuRMZsX7UZSmNsudIWE/FFVSdQXAq0Uc2wYmdMUfDub 5TgkFbOKtfh+ZzRMMuxkpTzVAsoo0mLpchQhgeDUEPk= Received: from [192.168.93.100] (host-94-101-2-100.igua.fi [94.101.2.100]) (AUTH: PLAIN yding, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by mail.cs.helsinki.fi with esmtp; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:33:49 +0300 id 00068A83.51BF80BD.00003E0E Message-ID: <51BF80BC.4000503@cs.helsinki.fi> Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:33:48 +0300 From: Aaron Yi DING Organization: Helsinki University User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dcrocker@bbiw.net, Dave Crocker , "Moriarty, Kathleen" , "diversity@ietf.org" References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <51BF3033.8090707@dcrocker.net> In-Reply-To: <51BF3033.8090707@dcrocker.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: SM , Arturo Servin Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 21:34:31 -0000 Hi, On 17/06/13 18:50, Dave Crocker wrote: > On 6/17/2013 12:37 AM, Moriarty, Kathleen wrote: >> I am at a conference in Bangkok and had an interesting conversation >> last night at the social. My talk tomorrow includes the MILE work. >> When I mentioned this someone commented that he really likes the IETF >> and has followed mailing lists like PKIX for years, but never >> participates. His initial plan was to monitor for a month, then >> become active. He kept saying in 2 more months, then just figured >> everyone else was smarter than him, so monitoring was better. I >> filled him in more on the culture and that even very smart people are >> not always right, even if they assert their answers as if they are. >> >> The next issue he brought up was conflicts on lists. It is not in >> his culture to engage in conflict, so he continues to monitor. >> Interestingly, he was very positive on the IETF work as a venue to >> get things done and of the work that happens. I'm still thinking >> about this one because he was so positive. > > > Interesting example. It provides two points, one that they still > think well of the IETF, and the other that they continue not to > participate. For our purposes here, the latter seems the more > significant to me. > For the first one, IETF is doing well IMO in many aspects. At least not as bad as we thought. If new comers obtain their first impression from our discussions in this diversity-list, guess what do they think of us? an organization in true mess with endless argument, or a place where people do care about its future and trying the best to mend. Would have been an interesting case study though. For the more sensible second part, participating IETF do require ice-breaking, mentally and particularly for people not fully aware the IETF/western culture. Possible solutions can be in the form of mentoring or word of mouth marketing. For example, the one Kathleen met in Bangkok may become more active and gradually participate in IETF after such ice-melting conversation, and good words may spread further from him onwards. Normally, based on my own Asian reflection, people could possibly think of IETF as a far distant land full of super smart engineers & disruptive argument that can easily 'burn' anyone who is not fluent in English nor equipped with proper western armor. As Kathleen brought up the conflict avoidance culture, to know how to express opinions in a straight-forward open manner, without worrying too much about what if my comments hurt others' feeling or will my words lead to further conflict, is not an easy mission and maybe beyond what we can do in short period of time. my two cents, Aaron > While there's always a danger in over-interpreting a single example, > it could be worth carefully considering and researching what we need > to do to get such folk to start contributing and feeling comfortable > about it. > > d/ > From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Tue Jun 18 02:11:06 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 49FFF21F9ADE for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:11:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.565 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.565 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.035, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 Re-tK-SC8emx for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:11:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pa0-x22c.google.com (mail-pa0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 880B021F9A9B for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:11:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id lj1so3792948pab.17 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:11:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=NNuW3y2Xv0jxQpcOq1OAWxjzYSvXp/6EnQcmeQuOn74=; b=dKLfm7PgcAxgIogxVXBlQHPzxd7lvP/GS5Tdf5qsTMBf1Lxot39QXR4ixvPyLkU1Oi HNLuTUm0uwYyr/NyysRlZshQ2Y4Eb0hb8NMCeBD6K8KSeDlyi3IxHLPaWwVjW0IdEGWw g9nuC8Pk2yK+O6jONMWNDrVqfhRL0dxcUK4vsp5TYUMY8cBFd9VXC4U8Lwkm4KFNEL1d oz25IKivUAYZYbZp0P64HplA1frRMbmqBEV2bb4MaWG56Ay4e4ThEWkLTONPH5qKraDD ZdC/AZd7T8VkPazuGKsmtb3H6T6NPgLGCyo9NLtKALjaw/h4WRK3sH+SfxS/0y9kLqDW pZ+w== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.121.131 with SMTP id lk3mr1354548pab.43.1371546665163; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:11:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:11:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51BEE5CD.2060903@cs.tcd.ie> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <51BEBED6.5090909@cs.tcd.ie> <51BEE5CD.2060903@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:11:04 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: Stephen Farrell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , Arturo Servin , "Moriarty, Kathleen" , SM Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 09:11:06 -0000 Ok, to make use of experiences, we should know your period experience, type of participating and your region of participation. My experience is two years listening start from 2009 and then two years posting on lists and never participated in meetings. Usually IETF still prefare to meet participants, but still they do it mostly in one region. comments below On 6/17/13, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > > On 06/17/2013 11:23 AM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >> I experience that old participants don't give chance to new >> participants > > My experience is that good contributions are welcomed regardless. > And useless ones are properly ignored once its clear that some > participant's contributions are generally useless. nothing is useless in equal discussions, it may be only in few people's opinion. The majority of the community are users not designers. So users are never useless even if they have wrong contributions. I think your opinion will not make IETF progress toward its visions. If your opinion is the IETF's opinion then I would go to others, but I think IETF wants all comments even if useless to few people. > > Good contributions earlier in the lifecycle of a WG naturally > tend to be more likely to result in a participant authoring > documents etc. Authoring documents that never get to be adopted by WGs, can make people discouraged, and will make IETF USELESS. Two regions are still mostly not adopting other regions few participants interests. > > But the main thing is that people should concentrate on making > good technical contributions. I agree, but people also concentrate to use their volunteering time, if IETF makes someone's time participating USELESS then he/she will not feel their contributions are useless but they will feel their times of participation were USELESS and that TIME is important for IETF progress, but few designers in one region are not using new participation positively. People, authors or designers (1,600 individuals) SHOULD allow users contributions (no ignore, but respond), to open communication between them and community. Now I see most people in the community ignoring also thoes few designers of IETF but I never thought that IETF few participants were useless because of that situation (I may change my opinion in future). AB From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Tue Jun 18 02:26:53 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 B47E321F9D28 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:26:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.267 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.267 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.267, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_66=0.6, 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 F2YNje2BOFiH for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:26:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pa0-x233.google.com (mail-pa0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 516DD21F9A5E for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:26:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id lf11so3793992pab.38 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:26:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=8akbJzSfNyh2fA93Vat7r/u1rcqa3XltCsNenTR5hKA=; b=l9+q8W7YlHsNbwj/NuUUPiVDK7rmXQclJuKi7fNr2F0jWcmyhaAI+qNps95vMB+yq9 ZcH1bXoTj776hOxL+/Ur9+sx4koJJY8ua0XceJrsQlp4WhZcddegMbpRatbEpSxuDJrb BCl4lBLdMZH2Uqpzov3D9ZnW+/kwrlhqKyrBnqKV4F3PvOU2jkjzh6otyKT3OXCIWgEt GKJqypcPhyJqUU/ZszoS1ajt5hbsZ2uyan+RyVCHtPnQg4VnqYhC9T6xp0E1zUJUyt3W 0m3EIMf3pJ2Vs0/byh9TFmS2KqkkW1HMmHvr87NGu6aYAzUvoLs5K6gbKyH5hrAhInM4 y/uQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.68.203.103 with SMTP id kp7mr8495140pbc.165.1371547613021; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:26:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:26:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net> Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:26:52 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: SM Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: diversity@ietf.org, "STARK, BARBARA H" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 09:26:53 -0000 Hi SM > The attitude that the COMMUNITY has. Do you talk to your friends about > IETF? No, I think still IETF is not mature. > Are you proud of it? no, but like to make it progress so I can be proud for it. > Will you encourage your friends to come? No, I still think it may wast my time or friends to attend, but posting to test the progress is a sign for future plans (maybe after one year). > Does it > make > sense to you? Is the community working towards a common goal? No, many are ignoring important issues in the community. > Most importantly, are we listening? or are we justing pretending to. > We are listening that is why IETF is one the track to better future. The problem is that majority of participants in IETF still think that contributions/inputs can be called noise, just because they receive many messages from few/someone they like to ignore. I hope some one answers one question of mine, that will help progress in participations: IF THE IETF CANNOT MAKE MEETINGS EQUALLY IN ALL WORLD REGIONS, THEN WHY IS IETF NOT HAVING FOR EACH WG THREE DIFFERENT REGION CO-CHAIRS? THREE= ASIA REGION, EUROPE&AFRICA REGION, AMERICA REGION AB From yding@cs.helsinki.fi Tue Jun 18 02:39:17 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 2D86521F9DDD for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:39:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 c+hZShlZWZhA for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:39:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from courier.cs.helsinki.fi (courier.cs.helsinki.fi [128.214.9.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8ABD621F9DDA for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:39:11 -0700 (PDT) X-DKIM: Courier DKIM Filter v0.50+pk-2013-06-17 courier.cs.helsinki.fi Tue Jun 18 12:39:08 2013 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cs.helsinki.fi; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= dkim20130528; bh=vSGg8Y42jzv4iECcmcYKV2j+j6nYSyGcHI0RUJsW1HM=; b= cyPln22H1nN3+uMEgsVVle3oZEoPytb2NHpmDu2JWvAuZLv1omRXa24be2yN76gg XwnvXtmpUO+hwE/QTanP/2ePajQL8R41bzoqNU7Ao4ZAgG1NnkY31EREzks6inO5 GRQwOvsQXqLBPeWMPXOEH6pmXbBYltrcTQODxKrYZOE= Received: from [10.3.89.150] ([62.237.32.34]) (AUTH: PLAIN yding, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by mail.cs.helsinki.fi with esmtp; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 12:39:07 +0300 id 00068A96.51C02ABB.00004B5C Message-ID: <51C02AB5.5010208@cs.helsinki.fi> Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 12:39:01 +0300 From: Aaron Yi DING User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Abdussalam Baryun References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <51BEBED6.5090909@cs.tcd.ie> <51BEE5CD.2060903@cs.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , Stephen Farrell Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 09:39:17 -0000 On 18/06/2013 12:11, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: > > nothing is useless in equal discussions, it may be only in few > people's opinion. Good point. > The majority of the community are users not > designers. So users are never useless even if they have wrong > contributions. Following the equal discussion path, I need to point out one thing, that comments are comments, and some of them may be less thoughtful when being spread to the list. Of course everyone has their own opinion towards what's useful and what's not, sorry, I can't change their mind and so can't you. IMO, Comments != Contributions although there is lose connection between them. > Authoring documents that never get to be adopted by WGs, can make > people discouraged, and will make IETF USELESS. Two regions are still > mostly not adopting other regions few participants interests. Such statement requires more thoughts before speaking out empirically. With research background, I kindly suggest to add at least one reference to such judgement, rather than merely blank complaint. >> But the main thing is that people should concentrate on making >> good technical contributions. > I agree, but people also concentrate to use their volunteering time, > if IETF makes someone's time participating USELESS then he/she will > not feel their contributions are useless but they will feel their > times of participation were USELESS and that TIME is important for > IETF progress, but few designers in one region are not using new > participation positively. > > People, authors or designers (1,600 individuals) SHOULD allow users > contributions (no ignore, but respond), to open communication between > them and community. Now I see most people in the community ignoring > also thoes few designers of IETF but I never thought that IETF few > participants were useless because of that situation (I may change my > opinion in future). Time is precious for everyone, you are right, and any contributions shall be appreciated, no matter from where or who. -- Aaron > AB > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity From stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie Tue Jun 18 03:00:03 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 5009721F9E60 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 03:00:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.224 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.224 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.375, 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 qLiH8wlvXEUe for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:59:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C91D21F9E03 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:59:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74D2EBE68; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:59:34 +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 oPpOZ070+Cqt; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:59:29 +0100 (IST) Received: from [172.30.0.172] (stat-217-145-38-54.xdsl.toledo.be [217.145.38.54]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3A1F1BE75; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:59:29 +0100 (IST) Message-ID: <51C02F81.4050001@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:59:29 +0100 From: Stephen Farrell User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Aaron Yi DING References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <51BEBED6.5090909@cs.tcd.ie> <51BEE5CD.2060903@cs.tcd.ie> <51C02AB5.5010208@cs.helsinki.fi> In-Reply-To: <51C02AB5.5010208@cs.helsinki.fi> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:00:03 -0000 On 06/18/2013 10:39 AM, Aaron Yi DING wrote: >> > > > Time is precious for everyone, you are right, and any contributions > shall be appreciated, no matter from where or who. The above is not quite right IMO. You need to factor in that there are many readers for each posting (~2000 on ietf@ietf.org and maybe a few hundred on a wg list), so people sending mail also need to consider that the reader's time is as precious as the sender's. But note that I said: > My experience is that good contributions are welcomed regardless. > And useless ones are properly ignored once its clear that some > participant's contributions are generally useless. For some people it does become clear to the community that their contributions are generally useless, normally after many many mail messages. From what I've seen that's not an easy state to get into, but does seem to be possible for a small number of people. In lots more cases, initial postings might not be very useful to a wg, but most people learn quickly, and its not hard to do, if you use a little common sense and have good technical knowledge. I think I've seen lots of times over the years where someone starts off with a message saying "what's that mean?" or "does that RFC/draft mean this?" and then go on to quickly make very useful contributions. S. From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Tue Jun 18 03:08:02 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 8012B21F9BAA for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 03:08:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.949 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.650, BAYES_00=-2.599] 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 IuJAzG0GC61C for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 03:07:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pd0-f174.google.com (mail-pd0-f174.google.com [209.85.192.174]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6020021F9BB5 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 03:07:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pd0-f174.google.com with SMTP id 10so3730307pdc.5 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 03:07:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=76/VZsIpaeMzNuw6zi6daZE7TwtszMrOef/iXdMIhD4=; b=tz8aSapb10u54EjhvRylh3Lp7acg28HVayYq2ZiFsO1CAymC1TQGL9K3haQRtntY8d IhCiP5QRRC3J7bQc6WpqZkMpjzRO2wpTBzkr5HyWsD505F7i8l+++5PRj6kEf164pZKu KP9css1WR0wLtUhhm7rjDzMLByn8vnxENKRou3x43h9AKSZa3m7bd8GkTqzBbOFwgYm0 imW/Xj9rb5vdXLcIOqpen+atRCiFBs5PeaPBPjqMJr5jlsXZ+R0qVZxCsOVgaWyXY5FD jXrFE60FPcZylRx8dJcedr5RteYT/BYQpcsjhIGzQ4QV04nZl6XQsoOU9UDabLaiU7hv TURg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.68.96.193 with SMTP id du1mr16653523pbb.142.1371550076715; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 03:07:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 03:07:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51C02AB5.5010208@cs.helsinki.fi> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <51BEBED6.5090909@cs.tcd.ie> <51BEE5CD.2060903@cs.tcd.ie> <51C02AB5.5010208@cs.helsinki.fi> Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 12:07:56 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: Aaron Yi DING Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:08:02 -0000 Hi Aaron, On 6/18/13, Aaron Yi DING wrote: > On 18/06/2013 12:11, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >> >> nothing is useless in equal discussions, it may be only in few >> people's opinion. > > Good point. > >> The majority of the community are users not >> designers. So users are never useless even if they have wrong >> contributions. > > Following the equal discussion path, I need to point out one thing, that > comments are comments, and some of them may be less thoughtful when > being spread to the list. Of course everyone has their own opinion > towards what's useful and what's not, sorry, I can't change their mind > and so can't you. > > IMO, Comments != Contributions IETF defines inputs as contributions, so then Comments == Contributions but I know what you mean that comments if not useful they are not a contribution to someone's new-thoughts or new-document. However, thoes COMMENTs can be a contribution to someone else :-) > > although there is lose connection between them. not sure what you mean ! > > >> Authoring documents that never get to be adopted by WGs, can make >> people discouraged, and will make IETF USELESS. Two regions are still >> mostly not adopting other regions few participants interests. > > Such statement requires more thoughts before speaking out empirically. > With research background, I kindly suggest to add at least one > reference to such judgement, rather than merely blank complaint. I don't speak here I just write, they are very different actions in my world. I did not complain here either, it was giving the opinion and reality of my feeling. I had a proposal for my I-D (manet-technology) but many in such WG did not want to adopt it I wanted to know the technical reason for objection but they don't have any clear one. I will renew it and work hard to make it adopted through, I may use my region support for that, or even complaining may be useful but not sure. > >>> But the main thing is that people should concentrate on making >>> good technical contributions. >> I agree, but people also concentrate to use their volunteering time, >> if IETF makes someone's time participating USELESS then he/she will >> not feel their contributions are useless but they will feel their >> times of participation were USELESS and that TIME is important for >> IETF progress, but few designers in one region are not using new >> participation positively. >> >> People, authors or designers (1,600 individuals) SHOULD allow users >> contributions (no ignore, but respond), to open communication between >> them and community. Now I see most people in the community ignoring >> also thoes few designers of IETF but I never thought that IETF few >> participants were useless because of that situation (I may change my >> opinion in future). > > > Time is precious for everyone, you are right, and any contributions > shall be appreciated, no matter from where or who. Therefore, you agree that we SHOULD concentrate not only on contributions (good, or not), but also on bringing more volunteer-times/participants into IETF. Thanks, I need your nice feedback to know where I was mistaken, AB From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Tue Jun 18 04:39:25 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 57BE721F9E79 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 04:39:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.553 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.553 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.047, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 yNmA9xJvZ+V6 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 04:39:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-x230.google.com (mail-pb0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C938D21F9E70 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 04:39:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pb0-f48.google.com with SMTP id ma3so3794101pbc.21 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 04:39:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=CXshqayyR7/2QG7WNKgtVJ7oJ84ExRg0uKNpEmwO1j0=; b=KfclGsMDc/KYTfmuRHwW01YbbQH3epMJEkGOJaGMhJIK3U2+QboKPzgIS45PGcDfmx ZnTebYZcR1qLokx7He84/JmFUMei/J8qsey2+yIkdP/ftDcomXnSgh5FXZgQUu/z3/hk 2+T2plaiVdi3PIMCwwQO/quzw6+HizPlWSozaogseViaFPzUjrZW5d6l41abvg3UkBqy FDFJkDPQewsweJOHFz/mkO5Y8kZgtB5U3jE06NVLbi0GDwDyO6WPeU+CvYyABrzp+kfc Wt+DluTa2LnSvTqe6RwOFTk5dDQZMBTlKKfvwTPUHmKUUbzygKU7LC3dIDDkuC2odhkW vPQg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.7.164 with SMTP id k4mr1784250paa.142.1371555564486; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 04:39:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 04:39:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:39:24 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: "diversity@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: [Diversity] Report For Someone's IETF Stories For Diversity Progress (was Re: Making allowances for someone) 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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:39:25 -0000 On 6/17/13, SM wrote: > I'll mention a story: > > At my second IETF meeting, I attended a number of sessions. At > one point, I dropped in to observe one of the working groups. > Someone (I don't recall whom, but I assumed at the time that it > was the chair) ejected me from the room with the assertion "this > working group is a closed group," and I forever since have had the > irrational feeling that I am not welcome in that particular domain. > The person, by the way, seemed as uncomfortable ejecting me as I > felt being ejected. Had I been able to talk with the person earlier, > learn the ground rules, and find out what was probably the truth, > that only one session of that working group was going to be closed > during the whole week, the incident could have been avoided. > I have also remote IETF participation true stories below, which is different than the above IETF meeting story. However, we need to report all kinds of stories to know the IETF Weaknesses and Strengths. - Someone before participating in IETF, sends comments to WG Editors on IETF WG list related to I-D, but no responds (ignored). - Someone before participating in IETF, sends questions/requests to WG Chairs on the IETF WG list, but no respond. - Someone after participating in IETF, contributed to an I-D but editors don't want to acknowledge in the acknowledgemnt asection (the document was changed but ignores such affect source). They say it was not major contribution so they allowed themself to ignore. - Someone while participating in IETF, prepared an I-D for the IETF and send to the related WG for their opinion but no respond from that WG (including WG Chair). - Someone posting trying to make the WG/IETF progress, but the old-participants/management think that he/she is making noise, they even respond to write that in public. - Someone in the community after participating in IETF, beleives that you will not be allowed to have an I-D adopted as IETF-doc until you attend many meetings and that you get participants to know you, or you get old-particpant to co-author. - Someone in the community after participating in IETF, beleives that IETF ignores inputs from people who do not author an I-D, or inputs from people who do not attend meetings. - Someone from the community after participating in IETF, beleives that he does not send emails/inputs to participants but sends his contributions to IETF/WG lists for IETF progress. Please note that the above are true stories. The persons who inform me part of the above stoped participating but I am not stoping and still trying to fix the IETF ignorances or fixing few opinions/stories (guide who beleive that there are input-noises/authorisation-to-not-allow in IETF). IMHO it is better to not attend IETF meetings until it is sure that thoes stories are fixed to follow the IETF vision, and not following few people's visions. AB From adrian@olddog.co.uk Tue Jun 18 05:10:56 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 4248E21F9946 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:10:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.584 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.584 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.015, BAYES_00=-2.599] 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 hbAepmYxHRWx for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:10:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (asmtp5.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E06B21F8C40 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:10:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r5ICAgam013528; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:10:47 +0100 Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r5ICAfaP013513 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:10:41 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'SM'" Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:10:40 +0100 Message-ID: <042f01ce6c1c$da5e99c0$8f1bcd40$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac5sHLM7d1vrqyu7Qa+h0yfbYdbzEg== Content-Language: en-gb Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: [Diversity] SM's story [Was: Making allowances for someone] X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 12:10:56 -0000 > At my second IETF meeting, I attended a number of sessions. At > one point, I dropped in to observe one of the working groups. > Someone (I don't recall whom, but I assumed at the time that it > was the chair) ejected me from the room with the assertion "this > working group is a closed group," and I forever since have had the > irrational feeling that I am not welcome in that particular domain. > The person, by the way, seemed as uncomfortable ejecting me as I > felt being ejected. Had I been able to talk with the person earlier, > learn the ground rules, and find out what was probably the truth, > that only one session of that working group was going to be closed > during the whole week, the incident could have been avoided. I think this is an important story. I am convinced that this was not a working group meeting. Such behaviour would not be acceptable from a working group chair and would, I believe, not be tolerated by others in the meeting. I would be shocked to find that a WG chair had acted like this. However, there are plenty of meetings held in rooms around the IETF that *are* closed meetings. For example, the IESG meets, groups of like-minded friends meet, design teams meet, companies even meet their customers. It would be reasonable to eject someone from one of those meetings. Often the embarrassment of ejecting someone from what was planned as a closed meeting can overwhelm the need to be polite and explain what is going on. It may also be the case that not enough consideration is given to how the incomer might not understand what is being said to them (so that it sounds like "this working group is a closed group"). For a story of my own, the IESG recently found an unknown person happily sitting at the table for one of their meetings. They were (I think) politely asked to leave, but I doubt that it was made clear who the IESG was and why the meeting was closed. I pretty sure that no-one took the time to find out who the person was, why they were there, and what their interest in the IETF was. I am not sure this is something we can "legislate" for. It sounds much more about being generally aware of other people. Adrian From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Tue Jun 18 05:16:34 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 AEF8521F99F8 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:16:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.008 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.008 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.591, BAYES_00=-2.599] 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 xlRJ+OiwRiGB for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:16:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pd0-f172.google.com (mail-pd0-f172.google.com [209.85.192.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1A7621F99D0 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:16:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pd0-f172.google.com with SMTP id z10so3861013pdj.17 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:16:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Xz/9dhyGJS6KNWD+LxxSwcX8LfNugOKa1HKkR6lagaY=; b=Q14o8s4wGx5ANVRJvci40kDqEyrLpSY/HkAFvoLa9ImIOE7VVPG/wOu/dPfhqvKl5a OUn1Tf0qw6yD8tbp8YJmfCxGGQcUvAKqwqhMnoYpKtIeiKmTsn8sWjSJ4n4Pp272DzsX 8TuDPUfMVRJXjdZ39uBTf4uUVuoU+o4dqQ2M2Q+Km2i0OEfayzWTmEsbm5dwv2XsBgSy 4cLJxBINEiihoEv0S/qhBUI3o+5GEhwU1kNxRvbANJTMLp4vmgOUvZRJgGZXAa/tMJr4 3EDzR6LRrglBCkahBD/CKdDk8gBSHKAOPBPKrbsSfiuDywFevFO1qzVuSK3FyxMQjj9X Mn9w== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.121.131 with SMTP id lk3mr1950661pab.43.1371557789414; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:16:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:16:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <042f01ce6c1c$da5e99c0$8f1bcd40$@olddog.co.uk> References: <042f01ce6c1c$da5e99c0$8f1bcd40$@olddog.co.uk> Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:16:29 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: adrian@olddog.co.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: SM , diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] SM's story [Was: Making allowances for someone] 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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 12:16:34 -0000 On 6/18/13, Adrian Farrel wrote: >> At my second IETF meeting, I attended a number of sessions. At >> one point, I dropped in to observe one of the working groups. >> Someone (I don't recall whom, but I assumed at the time that it >> was the chair) ejected me from the room with the assertion "this >> working group is a closed group," and I forever since have had the >> irrational feeling that I am not welcome in that particular domain. >> The person, by the way, seemed as uncomfortable ejecting me as I >> felt being ejected. Had I been able to talk with the person earlier, >> learn the ground rules, and find out what was probably the truth, >> that only one session of that working group was going to be closed >> during the whole week, the incident could have been avoided. > > I think this is an important story. I am convinced that this was not a > working > group meeting. Such behaviour would not be acceptable from a working group > chair > and would, I believe, not be tolerated by others in the meeting. I would be > shocked to find that a WG chair had acted like this. I think that WG Chairs are not monitored, and IETF only notices wrong doing when someone complains (no one including me like to complain, but seems like the only choice to progress). I beleive that the SM story could have happend and no one can be sure that it never happend or can happen again (because no one complained about it just now reported). AB From yding@cs.helsinki.fi Tue Jun 18 05:55:19 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 2C97121F9EE5 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:55:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 0gSAHQtasAxK for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:55:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from courier.cs.helsinki.fi (courier.cs.helsinki.fi [128.214.9.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CD4C21F9BBD for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:54:52 -0700 (PDT) X-DKIM: Courier DKIM Filter v0.50+pk-2013-06-17 courier.cs.helsinki.fi Tue Jun 18 15:54:36 2013 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cs.helsinki.fi; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type; s=dkim20130528; bh=AVsZi6+eI2hdjXEOSp cYMGtvJ6quUVmzZbcyz2jdVTo=; b=bLrDMYlxasGTdwC5nqJxJydLIFuj3pttEw oXA4jmPgpRBEzLFiaUbUQbXxv4XXGS5i2D8hvJVZUN78IysEhsv/BLMYxiLeAOtB MCn+FSiUDfM4qqw4yPduBgGLv3buwZejG38V8q+MeUQJsdeosg2WA7+yra+jdnP8 fL4DG7tm0= Received: from [10.3.89.150] ([62.237.32.34]) (AUTH: PLAIN yding, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by mail.cs.helsinki.fi with esmtp; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 15:54:36 +0300 id 0006815F.51C0588C.00001FFD Message-ID: <51C05887.7090503@cs.helsinki.fi> Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 15:54:31 +0300 From: Aaron Yi DING User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Farrell References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <51BEBED6.5090909@cs.tcd.ie> <51BEE5CD.2060903@cs.tcd.ie> <51C02AB5.5010208@cs.helsinki.fi> <51C02F81.4050001@cs.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: <51C02F81.4050001@cs.tcd.ie> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080306060602050505080300" Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 12:55:19 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080306060602050505080300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 18/06/2013 12:59, Stephen Farrell wrote: > On 06/18/2013 10:39 AM, Aaron Yi DING wrote: > > Time is precious for everyone, you are right, and any contributions > shall be appreciated, no matter from where or who. Hi Stephen, > The above is not quite right IMO. You need to factor in that there > are many readers for each posting (~2000 on ietf@ietf.org and > maybe a few hundred on a wg list), so people sending mail also > need to consider that the reader's time is as precious as the > sender's. Good that you point it out. The key part of the message was that contributions are different from comments. Before sending 'comments' to our lists, readers' time shall be considered and definitely should be appreciated. > But note that I said: > >> My experience is that good contributions are welcomed regardless. >> And useless ones are properly ignored once its clear that some >> participant's contributions are generally useless. > For some people it does become clear to the community that > their contributions are generally useless, normally after many > many mail messages. From what I've seen that's not an easy state > to get into, but does seem to be possible for a small number of > people. > > In lots more cases, initial postings might not be very useful > to a wg, but most people learn quickly, and its not hard to do, > if you use a little common sense and have good technical > knowledge. > > I think I've seen lots of times over the years where someone > starts off with a message saying "what's that mean?" or "does > that RFC/draft mean this?" and then go on to quickly make very > useful contributions. This is indeed common. My concern is that if we would enforce certain rigid rule, that for whatever opinion a person wants to post, they need to care about reader's time and feeling, then, people from IETF non-dominant regions could easily be led to another path -- being passive, rather than being participating. To be honest, I also appreciate if the mail senders could seriously consider my time to read their *comments*. At the same time, the level of tolerance varies a lot between people and also among different WGs. Again, it is a tricky issue and depending heavily on the persons involved (like SM's example about the WG chair). It's hard IMO to reach a balance satisfying everyone. From my observation so far, IETF is open enough and exhibit necessary tolerance to certain degree. Aaron > S. --------------080306060602050505080300 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 18/06/2013 12:59, Stephen Farrell wrote:
On 06/18/2013 10:39 AM, Aaron Yi DING wrote:

Time is precious for everyone, you are right, and any contributions
shall be appreciated, no matter from where or who.

Hi Stephen,

The above is not quite right IMO. You need to factor in that there
are many readers for each posting (~2000 on ietf@ietf.org and
maybe a few hundred on a wg list), so people sending mail also
need to consider that the reader's time is as precious as the
sender's.

Good that you point it out. The key part of the message was that contributions are different from comments. Before sending 'comments' to our lists, readers' time shall be considered and definitely should be appreciated.

But note that I said:


My experience is that good contributions are welcomed regardless.
And useless ones are properly ignored once its clear that some
participant's contributions are generally useless.

For some people it does become clear to the community that
their contributions are generally useless, normally after many
many mail messages. From what I've seen that's not an easy state
to get into, but does seem to be possible for a small number of
people.

In lots more cases, initial postings might not be very useful
to a wg, but most people learn quickly, and its not hard to do,
if you use a little common sense and have good technical
knowledge.

I think I've seen lots of times over the years where someone
starts off with a message saying "what's that mean?" or "does
that RFC/draft mean this?" and then go on to quickly make very
useful contributions.


This is indeed common. My concern is that if we would enforce certain rigid rule, that for whatever opinion a person wants to post, they need to care about reader's time and feeling, then, people from IETF non-dominant regions could easily be led to another path -- being passive, rather than being participating. To be honest, I also appreciate if the mail senders could seriously consider my time to read their comments.

At the same time, the level of tolerance varies a lot between people and also among different WGs. Again, it is a tricky issue and depending heavily on the persons involved (like SM's example about the WG chair). It's hard IMO to reach a balance satisfying everyone. From my observation so far, IETF is open enough and exhibit necessary tolerance to certain degree.

Aaron

S.

--------------080306060602050505080300-- From yding@cs.helsinki.fi Tue Jun 18 06:12:36 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 5682321F9B9C for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 06:12:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] 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 iZ4KAAIxAIQ3 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 06:12:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from courier.cs.helsinki.fi (courier.cs.helsinki.fi [128.214.9.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFEC921F9ACA for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 06:12:30 -0700 (PDT) X-DKIM: Courier DKIM Filter v0.50+pk-2013-06-17 courier.cs.helsinki.fi Tue Jun 18 16:12:15 2013 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cs.helsinki.fi; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type; s=dkim20130528; bh=YKVW41HTJCANGSspl6 LS1kLdfvCtvxQJvDcXQhaH5Fo=; b=fBMEVTlhI8e88/Rqi/7ppDNdhvvzIGuoeL 611Rgn74EUNLISfrjw9ZYMbDjAxV0cp5QVtWJLf2Ba2QKKt5Se5pY22J/jz/EpgH JJs7ZSsoE5afZLEQOeZUPODKZ0RPENYYLK2aJwsa57WOmTcNahlxjwr28K6B8fGY jAnMnrzgU= Received: from [10.3.89.150] ([62.237.32.34]) (AUTH: PLAIN yding, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by mail.cs.helsinki.fi with esmtp; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:12:15 +0300 id 0006812B.51C05CAF.00004D60 Message-ID: <51C05CAF.20706@cs.helsinki.fi> Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:12:15 +0300 From: Aaron Yi DING User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Abdussalam Baryun References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <51BEBED6.5090909@cs.tcd.ie> <51BEE5CD.2060903@cs.tcd.ie> <51C02AB5.5010208@cs.helsinki.fi> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090406090307090206020806" Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone 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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:12:36 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------090406090307090206020806 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi AB, On 18/06/2013 13:07, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: > Hi Aaron, > >> although there is lose connection between them. > not sure what you mean ! I mean certain comments become contributions eventually, and some do not. >> Time is precious for everyone, you are right, and any contributions >> shall be appreciated, no matter from where or who. > Therefore, you agree that we SHOULD concentrate not only on > contributions (good, or not), but also on bringing more > volunteer-times/participants into IETF. Here I bravely quote what's been said by Dave Crocker, which IMO is a balanced one. "We need IETF management to make choices that maximize the IETF's ability and reality of including and encouraging all interested participants, and maximize their contributions to IETF work." > Thanks, I need your nice feedback to know where I was mistaken, > > AB The call for community input is attached below if you are interested. Thanks, Aaron ------------------ Hi all, The diversity design team is working on mechanisms to increase the range of perspectives within the IETF, while maintaining high standards of quality. Our goal is to help improve the composition and dynamic of the IETF, by finding ways to incorporate a wide range of perspectives within the IETF, and specifically in the IETF management teams. One way of achieving this is to ensure that participants differ along many different personal, social, and professional attributes. The expectation is that the greater range of perspectives leads to considering issues more deeply and with more sensitivity. Community feedback is the most important input that helps us determine the aspects are currently working well in the IETF in this regard and those that are not. We cannot properly execute the task of proposing new mechanisms or modifying existing mechanisms to further these goals without **your** participation and feedback. We would like to help the IETF management make choices that maximize the IETF's ability to include and encourage all interested participants, and maximize their contributions to IETF work. On that basis, we are seeking input from people based on their personal experiences about * actions and activities that have worked well to improve the inclusiveness of the IETF process * actions and activitiets that have not worked well to improve the inclusiveness of the IETF process * actions and activities that have worked *against* inclusiveness of the IETF process If you have experience with other technology based organisations that have broad consultation practices, we would also like to hear about examples of actions taken that work well to include participation from diverse communities Please provide us your input by sending an email to the diversity design team at diversity-dt@ietf.org . You can provide **anonymous** feedback by contacting either of the design team leads Suresh Krishnan and Kathleen Moriarty who will anonymize it for the rest of the members. --------------090406090307090206020806 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi AB,

On 18/06/2013 13:07, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
Hi Aaron,


although there is lose connection between them.

not sure what you mean !


I mean certain comments become contributions eventually, and some do not.


      

        
Time is precious for everyone, you are right, and any contributions
shall be appreciated, no matter from where or who.


      

      
Therefore, you agree that we SHOULD concentrate not only on
contributions (good, or not), but also on bringing more
volunteer-times/participants into IETF.


    

    

    

    Here I bravely quote what's been said by Dave Crocker, which IMO is
    a balanced one. 

    

       "We need IETF management to make choices that maximize the IETF's
    ability
    

        and reality of including and encouraging all interested
    participants, and
    

        maximize their contributions to IETF work."
    

    

    

      
Thanks, I need your nice feedback to know where I was mistaken,

AB


    

    

    The call for community input is attached below if you are
    interested.

    

    Thanks,

    Aaron

    

    ------------------

    
Hi all,

    
 

    
The diversity design team is working on
      mechanisms to increase

    
the range of perspectives within the IETF,
      while maintaining high

    
standards of quality.

    
 

    
Our goal is to help improve the composition and
      dynamic of the

    
IETF, by finding ways to incorporate a wide
      range of perspectives

    
within the IETF, and specifically in the IETF
      management teams.

    
One way of achieving this is to ensure that
      participants differ

    
along many different personal, social, and
      professional

    
attributes. The expectation is that the greater
      range of

    
perspectives leads to considering issues more
      deeply and with

    
more sensitivity.

    
 

    
Community feedback is the most important input
      that helps us

    
determine the aspects are currently working
      well in the IETF in

    
this regard and those that are not. We cannot
      properly execute

    
the task of proposing new mechanisms or
      modifying existing

    
mechanisms to further these goals without
      **your** participation

    
and feedback.

    
 

    
We would like to help the IETF management make
      choices that

    
maximize the IETF's ability to include and
      encourage all

    
interested participants, and maximize their
      contributions to IETF

    
work.

    
 

    
On that basis, we are seeking input from people
      based on their

    
personal experiences about

    
 

    
* actions and activities that have worked well
      to improve the

    
  inclusiveness of the IETF process

    
 

    
* actions and activitiets that have not worked
      well to improve

    
  the inclusiveness of the IETF process

    
 

    
* actions and activities that have worked
      *against* inclusiveness

    
  of the IETF process

    
 

    
If you have experience with other technology
      based organisations

    
that have broad consultation practices, we
      would also like to

    
hear about examples of actions taken that work
      well to include

    
participation from diverse communities

    
 

    
Please provide us your input by sending an
      email to the diversity

    
design team at diversity-dt@ietf.org . You can
      provide

    
**anonymous** feedback by contacting either of
      the design team

    
leads Suresh Krishnan
      <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com> and Kathleen

    
Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty@emc.com> who
      will anonymize it for

    the rest of the members.

  


--------------090406090307090206020806--

From adrian@olddog.co.uk  Tue Jun 18 06:23:20 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 7204821F9DE8 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 06:23:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.584
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.584 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.015,  BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 Q1NRqaItzZgH for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 06:23:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (asmtp4.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CF1B21F9D36 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 06:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r5IDMvJw024534;  Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:23:00 +0100
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r5IDMuYk024522 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:22:57 +0100
From: "Adrian Farrel" 
To: "'Abdussalam Baryun'" 
References: <042f01ce6c1c$da5e99c0$8f1bcd40$@olddog.co.uk> 
In-Reply-To: 
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:22:56 +0100
Message-ID: <044b01ce6c26$f26c8b80$d745a280$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQEg/VlzFm76h1t0UXLCyUyxtjnPBwIYllhumoWEyuA=
Content-Language: en-gb
Cc: 'SM' , diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] SM's story [Was: Making allowances for someone]
X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
List-Id: Diversity open mailing list 
List-Unsubscribe: , 
List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: , 
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:23:20 -0000

> I think that WG Chairs are not monitored, and IETF only notices wrong
> doing when someone complains (no one including me like to complain,
> but seems like the only choice to progress).

Don' t be misled by the calmness of the swan above the water! Under the surface
the legs and paddling frantically.

WG are monitored by their ADs and by the community. It is not necessary to
"complain" to make sure an AD is aware of what the chairs have done. But you'll
find that the responsible AD is usually watching (if sometimes with a short
time-delay).

But, if you don't like what a chair has done and it is a cause for concern to
you then you do have to complain. Is this a cultural issue we need to be aware
of? Should we make it easier for people to find a way to register their
concerns?

At the same time, is there a cultural issue about the resolution of complaints?
What if someone complains and is told "I hear you, but I don't agree with or
uphold your complaint?" How is such a resolution perceived and at what point
should the complaint be dropped or escalated?

> I beleive that the SM story could have happend and no one can be sure
> that it never happend or can happen again (because no one complained
> about it just now reported).

Who said it never happened?
If it was in a WG (and not something that was mistaken for a WG), who else was
in the room?

But, by the way, we have a responsibility to pass on these stories with the
data. Not attacking SM, but what use to me is his story? If it really did happen
exactly as told, I would like to make sure that the chairs involved do not
behave like this in future. How can I do that without even knowing which IETF
meeting, which WG, etc.? All I can do is preach homilies to the collected WG
chairs. If (as I suggested) the issue was confusion about the type of meeting,
how can I ensure the person concerned is mollified and understands what
happened? All I can do is make sure the Tao mentions the many different types of
meeting that exist at the IETF.

Adrian


From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Tue Jun 18 07:21:18 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 DD71E21F9C41 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:21:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.557
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.557 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.043,  BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 9nIdB-w2Bc6B for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:21:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-x235.google.com (mail-pb0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16D0221F9B9E for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:21:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f53.google.com with SMTP id xb12so3931016pbc.26 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:21:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=p7FDBgWpHrOQRZrfWs/cNzwkEZDhA3KqNGOWaZ43aE0=; b=Z5XtP4NTTdu8p1kDbaMf05lJVnJG+WwXuTXcmllA5LTqqZPi1fU0I4+J/09pgHWVxl sV9ArrKo27BdvTk350+3FHAKVPQpXzI/uz901wfCPjiEjBekAasxwWhaaXt+7HGxlmOs BU7hb76aHJZv+29ToBSjWKKvbl2ojntkyCZW9Ad2TQxcQ7rteNw5XGmfJ+R84xvSH/r6 nYJ+MonF/FO8VbcuQyXjdVJpacOs6kbkv2Qs/Fs1dIFK0D6TMZOELc4Gkrk3TTyDsHz3 M5+1JNVhLfWXu/S9NGHaf3RhS1nZwDQZg/RZ4FZm8gp97gFfi1Iy5A/Zin6RwOwNwCc8 18BQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.68.203.103 with SMTP id kp7mr9467101pbc.165.1371565275835; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:21:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:21:15 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <044b01ce6c26$f26c8b80$d745a280$@olddog.co.uk>
References: <042f01ce6c1c$da5e99c0$8f1bcd40$@olddog.co.uk>  <044b01ce6c26$f26c8b80$d745a280$@olddog.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:21:15 +0200
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: SM , diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] SM's story [Was: Making allowances for someone]
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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:21:19 -0000

Hi Adrian,

My thoughts/questions below, but thanks for your input.

On 6/18/13, Adrian Farrel  wrote:
>> I think that WG Chairs are not monitored, and IETF only notices wrong
>> doing when someone complains (no one including me like to complain,
>> but seems like the only choice to progress).
>
> Don' t be misled by the calmness of the swan above the water! Under the
> surface
> the legs and paddling frantically.
>
> WG are monitored by their ADs and by the community. It is not necessary to
> "complain" to make sure an AD is aware of what the chairs have done. But
> you'll
> find that the responsible AD is usually watching (if sometimes with a short
> time-delay).

Usually any person doing a chair role in an organisation should be
monitored by third party also, not only by who chosen that person in
the chair position. Usually newcomers don't get to choose the chairs,
so they will not complain but mostly leave.

>
> But, if you don't like what a chair has done and it is a cause for concern
> to
> you then you do have to complain. Is this a cultural issue we need to be
> aware
> of? Should we make it easier for people to find a way to register their
> concerns?

Yes we SHOULD make it easier for people to make their concerns (not to
be ignored or not used negatively by others). I have gave concerns in
past but experienced it used by others against me, so why not having a
system in IETF to report concerns without knowing reporters but just
the incidents and mistaken-managers title. Each reported concerns
should be replied to in public by management.

>
> At the same time, is there a cultural issue about the resolution of
> complaints?

It is mostly good people don't like to complain about
something/someone that has no business to them (business = any
involving personal money/benefit).

> What if someone complains and is told "I hear you, but I don't agree with
> or
> uphold your complaint?" How is such a resolution perceived and at what
> point
> should the complaint be dropped or escalated?

A third part, as Complain Committee which mostly is not involving
managers or who the complain is related to. As example if I compalin
about WG chair (SM report story), I will get the AD defending that
Chair most likely, so I would like to complain to a third party. Still
IETF has not allowed such great system of third party on low levels.
It is a waste of time to go through long discussions with ADs on
complains issues I think.
>
>> I beleive that the SM story could have happend and no one can be sure
>> that it never happend or can happen again (because no one complained
>> about it just now reported).
>
> Who said it never happened?

You beleive that it was not a WG Chiar, so you think it never happend.

> If it was in a WG (and not something that was mistaken for a WG), who else
> was
> in the room?

Why we are investigating if the report is true or not, why don't we
discuss that what system can make no option of chairs ignoring
diversity (or not allowing other region participants).

>
> But, by the way, we have a responsibility to pass on these stories with the
> data. Not attacking SM, but what use to me is his story? If it really did
> happen
> exactly as told, I would like to make sure that the chairs involved do not
> behave like this in future.

It is use to you and all of us I think. We realise the status of IETF
in someone's experience, we SHOULD make attention to all individuals
in the community. We SHOULD make sure we get a system that stops any
manager in IETF to perform wrongly.

> How can I do that without even knowing which
> IETF
> meeting, which WG, etc.?

The reason of the report is not to complain about someone/something,
the reason is to inform the IETF that there are mistakes happening,
please IETF be aware of them, and try to make thoes not applicable in
future.

> All I can do is preach homilies to the collected
> WG
> chairs. If (as I suggested) the issue was confusion about the type of
> meeting,
> how can I ensure the person concerned is mollified and understands what
> happened? All I can do is make sure the Tao mentions the many different
> types of
> meeting that exist at the IETF.

Are thoes private meetings under IETF regulations or procedures? I
never heard that we get at meetings private rooms discussing important
issues of IETF. Do thoes private meeting report to community the
out-comes or even the result of IETF business is private? Who are
Allowed and who are not-Allowed (seems like the subject of
Making-Allowance is related in private meetings, do we exclude some
regions?) to attend such meetings, do we have a procedure for that or
it depends on someone's opinion?

We also need to learn/ensure from the SM reported Story that ALL IETF
managers understand that they SHOULD not let any mistake happen again.
Also, we SHOULD make new systems/procedures to avoid some
misunderstandning (either from managers or participants) and not-allow
wrong behavior.

AB

From kathleen.moriarty@emc.com  Tue Jun 18 07:33:29 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 EF59021E8053 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:33:29 -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=[AWL=0.000,  BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 H5P7d-oBd89A for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:33:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (hop-nat-141.emc.com [168.159.213.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21BB621F9C08 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:33:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hop04-l1d11-si03.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI03.isus.emc.com [10.254.111.23]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id r5IEXMlQ019899 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:33:23 -0400
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (mailhubhoprd01.lss.emc.com [10.254.221.251]) by hop04-l1d11-si03.isus.emc.com (RSA Interceptor); Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:33:07 -0400
Received: from mxhub36.corp.emc.com (mxhub36.corp.emc.com [10.254.93.84]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id r5IEWqQ9005205; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:33:05 -0400
Received: from mxhub39.corp.emc.com (128.222.70.106) by mxhub36.corp.emc.com (10.254.93.84) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.297.1; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:32:58 -0400
Received: from mx15a.corp.emc.com ([169.254.1.184]) by mxhub39.corp.emc.com ([128.222.70.106]) with mapi; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:32:57 -0400
From: "Moriarty, Kathleen" 
To: Abdussalam Baryun 
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:32:50 -0400
Thread-Topic: [Diversity] SM's story [Was: Making allowances for someone]
Thread-Index: Ac5sMLnW/RUQwzVATk+boIqZfELgTQ==
Message-ID: <710E349D-C0D0-4838-B9DE-63DC9D382E23@emc.com>
References: <042f01ce6c1c$da5e99c0$8f1bcd40$@olddog.co.uk>  <044b01ce6c26$f26c8b80$d745a280$@olddog.co.uk> 
In-Reply-To: 
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-EMM-MHVC: 1
Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , "adrian@olddog.co.uk" , SM 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] SM's story [Was: Making allowances for someone]
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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:33:30 -0000

The reasons listed in the beginning of the message sound very much like the=
 justification for an ombudsman role in a company.  It is important to have=
 someone who knows how to take in feedback and potentially resolve conflict=
s.  I don't know if this is possible, but we can include it as a potential =
suggestion.

Thank you,
Kathleen=20

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 18, 2013, at 9:21 PM, "Abdussalam Baryun"  wrote:

> Hi Adrian,
>=20
> My thoughts/questions below, but thanks for your input.
>=20
> On 6/18/13, Adrian Farrel  wrote:
>>> I think that WG Chairs are not monitored, and IETF only notices wrong
>>> doing when someone complains (no one including me like to complain,
>>> but seems like the only choice to progress).
>>=20
>> Don' t be misled by the calmness of the swan above the water! Under the
>> surface
>> the legs and paddling frantically.
>>=20
>> WG are monitored by their ADs and by the community. It is not necessary =
to
>> "complain" to make sure an AD is aware of what the chairs have done. But
>> you'll
>> find that the responsible AD is usually watching (if sometimes with a sh=
ort
>> time-delay).
>=20
> Usually any person doing a chair role in an organisation should be
> monitored by third party also, not only by who chosen that person in
> the chair position. Usually newcomers don't get to choose the chairs,
> so they will not complain but mostly leave.
>=20
>>=20
>> But, if you don't like what a chair has done and it is a cause for conce=
rn
>> to
>> you then you do have to complain. Is this a cultural issue we need to be
>> aware
>> of? Should we make it easier for people to find a way to register their
>> concerns?
>=20
> Yes we SHOULD make it easier for people to make their concerns (not to
> be ignored or not used negatively by others). I have gave concerns in
> past but experienced it used by others against me, so why not having a
> system in IETF to report concerns without knowing reporters but just
> the incidents and mistaken-managers title. Each reported concerns
> should be replied to in public by management.
>=20
>>=20
>> At the same time, is there a cultural issue about the resolution of
>> complaints?
>=20
> It is mostly good people don't like to complain about
> something/someone that has no business to them (business =3D any
> involving personal money/benefit).
>=20
>> What if someone complains and is told "I hear you, but I don't agree wit=
h
>> or
>> uphold your complaint?" How is such a resolution perceived and at what
>> point
>> should the complaint be dropped or escalated?
>=20
> A third part, as Complain Committee which mostly is not involving
> managers or who the complain is related to. As example if I compalin
> about WG chair (SM report story), I will get the AD defending that
> Chair most likely, so I would like to complain to a third party. Still
> IETF has not allowed such great system of third party on low levels.
> It is a waste of time to go through long discussions with ADs on
> complains issues I think.
>>=20
>>> I beleive that the SM story could have happend and no one can be sure
>>> that it never happend or can happen again (because no one complained
>>> about it just now reported).
>>=20
>> Who said it never happened?
>=20
> You beleive that it was not a WG Chiar, so you think it never happend.
>=20
>> If it was in a WG (and not something that was mistaken for a WG), who el=
se
>> was
>> in the room?
>=20
> Why we are investigating if the report is true or not, why don't we
> discuss that what system can make no option of chairs ignoring
> diversity (or not allowing other region participants).
>=20
>>=20
>> But, by the way, we have a responsibility to pass on these stories with =
the
>> data. Not attacking SM, but what use to me is his story? If it really di=
d
>> happen
>> exactly as told, I would like to make sure that the chairs involved do n=
ot
>> behave like this in future.
>=20
> It is use to you and all of us I think. We realise the status of IETF
> in someone's experience, we SHOULD make attention to all individuals
> in the community. We SHOULD make sure we get a system that stops any
> manager in IETF to perform wrongly.
>=20
>> How can I do that without even knowing which
>> IETF
>> meeting, which WG, etc.?
>=20
> The reason of the report is not to complain about someone/something,
> the reason is to inform the IETF that there are mistakes happening,
> please IETF be aware of them, and try to make thoes not applicable in
> future.
>=20
>> All I can do is preach homilies to the collected
>> WG
>> chairs. If (as I suggested) the issue was confusion about the type of
>> meeting,
>> how can I ensure the person concerned is mollified and understands what
>> happened? All I can do is make sure the Tao mentions the many different
>> types of
>> meeting that exist at the IETF.
>=20
> Are thoes private meetings under IETF regulations or procedures? I
> never heard that we get at meetings private rooms discussing important
> issues of IETF. Do thoes private meeting report to community the
> out-comes or even the result of IETF business is private? Who are
> Allowed and who are not-Allowed (seems like the subject of
> Making-Allowance is related in private meetings, do we exclude some
> regions?) to attend such meetings, do we have a procedure for that or
> it depends on someone's opinion?
>=20
> We also need to learn/ensure from the SM reported Story that ALL IETF
> managers understand that they SHOULD not let any mistake happen again.
> Also, we SHOULD make new systems/procedures to avoid some
> misunderstandning (either from managers or participants) and not-allow
> wrong behavior.
>=20
> AB
> _______________________________________________
> diversity mailing list
> diversity@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>=20

From dhc@dcrocker.net  Tue Jun 18 07:36:36 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 A95AB21F9F47 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:36:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.535
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.535 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.064,  BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 WPvYQkD+vzFL for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:36:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB16121F9F18 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:36:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.66] (76-218-9-215.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.9.215]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r5IEaRHi019659 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:36:31 -0700
Message-ID: <51C0705C.3020704@dcrocker.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:36:12 -0700
From: Dave Crocker 
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: diversity@ietf.org
References: <042f01ce6c1c$da5e99c0$8f1bcd40$@olddog.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <042f01ce6c1c$da5e99c0$8f1bcd40$@olddog.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.66]); Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:36:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [Diversity] SM's story [Was: Making allowances for someone]
X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: Diversity open mailing list 
List-Unsubscribe: , 
List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: , 
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:36:36 -0000

On 6/18/2013 5:10 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> For a story of my own, the IESG recently found an unknown person happily sitting
> at the table for one of their meetings. They were (I think) politely asked to
> leave, but I doubt that it was made clear who the IESG was and why the meeting
> was closed. I pretty sure that no-one took the time to find out who the person
> was, why they were there, and what their interest in the IETF was.
>
> I am not sure this is something we can "legislate" for. It sounds much more
> about being generally aware of other people.



On the other hand...

Most discussion of 'diversity' concerns the statistics of group 
composition.  But there have been some references to different styles of 
behavior that increase or decrease the IETF's tone of inclusiveness. 
For example, the common style of hostile debating is hugely /ex/cluding 
for many cultures.

So for concerns about interaction style, it's reasonable to consider 
changes by all of /us/, to make the IETF work better for "outsiders".

The above is a good, simple example:  We all need to keep in mind that 
the basic model for the IETF is that it is open.  Hence any meeting that 
excludes someone has an obligation to explain itself to folk who are 
being excluded.  Not just that they need to leave, but why this group is 
closed.  And a pro forma apology for the situation always helps.

We can't make a specific rule for every behavior that requires such 
consideration.  What we need to do is find ways to train our community 
to think about interaction style and -- especially -- how to make things 
more comfortable for the person we are talking to.

This would be a culture shift for the entire IETF.  That's a big deal of 
course, but it would represent a considerable milestone of maturation 
for the community.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

From sm@resistor.net  Tue Jun 18 07:59:12 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 120BA21F9C1D for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:59:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.192
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.192 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.237, BAYES_00=-2.599, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=0.044, J_CHICKENPOX_66=0.6, 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 h8YiIMqCPHzS for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:59:08 -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 6499421F9BAD for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:59:08 -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 r5IEx0ZR013321; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:59:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371567546; bh=Z31Z86PUlHqf1LiyE6Vg77RMUTdeFQEWgqh9Vd5PF7E=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=GdGblcPjruj6WoIigDpVIgCIib8WE9aL9AVYcKxVllRoLSkwwHRCWD2chCQislW8n vH8zFlzFG520SvtaMoH8wBx0KwiN+6tnorCnK+4he1Uhw3lCA5n77lwaB4eyU6JOj2 V5irmaultYpmMcnsPbzwUFsNgbJogfUuS73ZF+qE=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371567546; i=@resistor.net; bh=Z31Z86PUlHqf1LiyE6Vg77RMUTdeFQEWgqh9Vd5PF7E=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=OfyoqcwkaDPqj3kdxWGZa/nY2+N5gTAcUCGetsNMizfXTp8wJTZnPi37pqgm7OPz3 SZHh5U0ILDwmA+I2O97N932rwz1+JpUwpE1hJC8dx1LhEj33mmy3I8qmRSrsslZTGC 7AAiMyO1RsBi9rP+QJniRCGqZdTr2D3WsircHZik=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 04:38:50 -0700
To: Abdussalam Baryun 
From: SM 
In-Reply-To: 
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone
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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:59:12 -0000

Hi Abdussalam,
At 02:26 18-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>I hope some one answers one question of mine, that will help progress
>in participations:
>
>IF THE IETF CANNOT MAKE MEETINGS EQUALLY IN ALL WORLD REGIONS, THEN
>WHY IS IETF NOT HAVING FOR EACH WG THREE DIFFERENT REGION CO-CHAIRS?
>
>THREE= ASIA REGION, EUROPE&AFRICA REGION, AMERICA REGION


The diversity design team is working on mechanisms to increase the 
range of perspectives within the IETF, while maintaining high 
standards of quality (see 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg80076.html ).  I 
suggest providing input about that.

I unfortunately do not have an answer for the question that was 
asked.  It would be helpful in my opinion to suggest actions which 
will deliver results.  A person may, for example, suggest that each 
working group could have three different region co-chairs.  It would 
help if an explanation was included with the suggestion or else it 
will be difficult to assess whether the action will work well or not.

Regards,
-sm 


From dhc@dcrocker.net  Tue Jun 18 08:07:51 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 29D6C21F9C40 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 08:07:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.24
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.24 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.241,  BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_66=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 0re1NC4c1btk for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 08:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BE8C11E80C5 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 08:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.66] (76-218-9-215.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.9.215]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r5IF7g1i020798 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 08:07:46 -0700
Message-ID: <51C077AF.8030301@dcrocker.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 08:07:27 -0700
From: Dave Crocker 
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: diversity@ietf.org
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.66]); Tue, 18 Jun 2013 08:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone
X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: Diversity open mailing list 
List-Unsubscribe: , 
List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: , 
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 15:07:51 -0000

>> IF THE IETF CANNOT MAKE MEETINGS EQUALLY IN ALL WORLD REGIONS, THEN
>> WHY IS IETF NOT HAVING FOR EACH WG THREE DIFFERENT REGION CO-CHAIRS?
>>
>> THREE= ASIA REGION, EUROPE&AFRICA REGION, AMERICA REGION
...
> I unfortunately do not have an answer for the question that was asked.


Though it's strictly a personal opinion, I'll offer a possible answer:

      The question implies a simplicity to resolution of diversity 
concerns that does not match reality. It asserts a quota model, and 
these are known to be highly problematic.

First, 3 co-chairs is too many, almost always.

Second, if we mandate variety according to region, then why not also 
mandate variety according to gender, training (eg, hardware vs. 
software), specialization layer (eg, apps vs routing), and so on?

Each of these produce very different perspectives.  Any one of them 
might produce a perspective that is important to the work.

We need diversity, but that does not mean mandating specific allocations 
in management teams.

d/
-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

From sm@resistor.net  Tue Jun 18 09:16:06 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 581BC21F8952 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 09:16:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.505
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.505 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.094, 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 IeyJRaSbYIdj for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 09:16:05 -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 44D9E21F9079 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 09:15:46 -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 r5IGFdm1022148; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 09:15:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371572145; bh=EZzFv/wtEgoZgP3gPlqQ8+ICLZ6GK7vawwajNFduXhc=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=kzIywNQbkdvY0tL/zwqkOe9YZqLCeAQ6QwwD6DUgbO+gqQwgst2oJVttFAM3nIRhc Lpk/J15OYrxdpVM7F65eHsBSmvT/UBSr6kfivU0G+klGN1UXF1cW80imRirvDR4Mv3 r6mQYwp7eDwkqKsKJ/lwaaclrQw85Im6ZapDeGzE=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371572145; i=@resistor.net; bh=EZzFv/wtEgoZgP3gPlqQ8+ICLZ6GK7vawwajNFduXhc=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=KxLL9zmBUa9kw4thHfsRZQYGowpUl/JLr2iz/Pxof2tcIie7IIhBMg2Nd7/SV4K3F P6CUgTj/TInYdG8zYnWBt4o6zRBiS8RmVF3Y62gd/CBVZVWUYzVxHgeuJ26Jpr1xDp naCi7KelLnJHiD0HIbOzRLVSzueAq3x/m7fKpHvQ=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130618081631.0c5a8f28@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 09:14:38 -0700
To: diversity@ietf.org
From: SM 
In-Reply-To: <042f01ce6c1c$da5e99c0$8f1bcd40$@olddog.co.uk>
References: <042f01ce6c1c$da5e99c0$8f1bcd40$@olddog.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk
Subject: Re: [Diversity] SM's story [Was: Making allowances for someone]
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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:16:06 -0000

At 05:10 18-06-2013, Adrian Farrel wrote:
>I think this is an important story. I am convinced that this was not a working
>group meeting. Such behaviour would not be acceptable from a working 
>group chair
>and would, I believe, not be tolerated by others in the meeting. I would be
>shocked to find that a WG chair had acted like this.

The story I posted is not my story.  It is a story that was 
originally posted over 20 years ago.  What I retain from the story is:

   "Had I been able to talk with the person earlier, learn the ground rules,
    and find out what was probably the truth, that only one session of that
    working group was going to be closed during the whole week, the incident
    could have been avoided."

And that the person persevered.

Nowadays, nobody would prevent any person from attending a working 
group meeting.  That's why I did not pay any attention to that part 
of the story.

Regards,
-sm



From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Tue Jun 18 10:32:46 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 8B04821E8091 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:32:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.261
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.261 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.261, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_66=0.6, 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 2Tx1zpAx6yxx for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:32:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x22c.google.com (mail-pa0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED7B321F9AAA for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:32:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id lj1so4238155pab.17 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:32:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=AnVdD7Rs0qGRrwcxDn8WcY7oScCSNl6kUXSJqxlePS8=; b=F72SlunTNY8ht6ppHBgcCj0ialdl3v8GDLEDCuZPi+vqiduYPRAAe6MX3lVh4N8eFv 8wz8+vnKXbeVTzev7P4iH2eih6ucgWSDyAgdm+eBOn7n/+HyHjsB5VQBpoeSNw2fdVUE E6Q/wNJ13CHYvy7F2rC6/RUeWId4agXC0TtEMXNoHrPlh5Id94ZSeI8k6UEDLqLB9/j/ WyRujWYys01iYWH7uOpDhPGMFWcS8mRB0AWmPfNVz9tEBA9MXxVOeLYVgufqLHOy3eOT d6L5LGKCSsCZH4JjpPMMoXXca0cMiwvbmPiT22zE9VHEEOpWBdGwxPatEH2GDn2aHCBm eQ8Q==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.68.52.10 with SMTP id p10mr3626700pbo.92.1371576765732; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:32:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:32:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:32:45 +0200
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: SM 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone
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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 17:32:46 -0000

Hi SM,

I think that IETF WG Chairs are the source of making allowance for
someone or for participations, they have tools in procedure to exclude
someone from participation for sometimes related to some conditions.

On 6/18/13, SM  wrote:
> Hi Abdussalam,
> At 02:26 18-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>>I hope some one answers one question of mine, that will help progress
>>in participations:
>>
>>IF THE IETF CANNOT MAKE MEETINGS EQUALLY IN ALL WORLD REGIONS, THEN
>>WHY IS IETF NOT HAVING FOR EACH WG THREE DIFFERENT REGION CO-CHAIRS?
>>
>>THREE= ASIA REGION, EUROPE&AFRICA REGION, AMERICA REGION
>
>
> The diversity design team is working on mechanisms to increase the
> range of perspectives within the IETF, while maintaining high
> standards of quality (see
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg80076.html ).  I
> suggest providing input about that.

I seen that post questions, which still need time to collect my reply.
Who are the diversity design team and how they were chosen? Could
others join or this team is another close team from the community?

>
> I unfortunately do not have an answer for the question that was
> asked.  It would be helpful in my opinion to suggest actions which
> will deliver results.  A person may, for example, suggest that each
> working group could have three different region co-chairs.  It would
> help if an explanation was included with the suggestion or else it
> will be difficult to assess whether the action will work well or not.

OK, usually we now have two Chairs (what chairs role in WG, and what
they can do?), but they are mostly from same region, they are not
familiar with different markets/needs in different regions. How do
they adopt/encourage new work in IETF from the Internet community?

I thought in a different way of assess-procedure, I see it difficult
to know why our procedure has two chairs for each WG chosen by ADs.
Why not the community involved with the ADs, so why was it done this
way in IETF procedure excluding WG participants?

I maybe missing something or misunderstood,

AB

From sm@resistor.net  Tue Jun 18 11:36:41 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 9526D11E80F9 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:36:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.509
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.509 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.090, 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 5vd3L9youNjH for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:36:40 -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 0A00A11E80F8 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:36:39 -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 r5IIaV84005826; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:36:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371580596; bh=QlsTlerySChj8ydRILak0qjzaqYE39ZknyL54CtVtmg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=Z/eZx2JbWbMi9arO++5TTtbpFmHoKOY4o7T0+t6fCETA/ubYHB67yxOzJkZ+r7uhb GTgi1imRrZiRQIcqLJe61NH3Bvbqt2y0MK49TIHJ1iHX2ne+v/s+A5xgpq5S6Zv87E gJ2qydZw20Ha8KRdKg5MaSdI6mAFIvywesTSPaI8=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371580596; i=@resistor.net; bh=QlsTlerySChj8ydRILak0qjzaqYE39ZknyL54CtVtmg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=MR/sxvjQnvBeGTpmPaGtK2H6V7A/tuNzLo3/CWAdARsC93lpdicZGDpgyJH45a755 CRcaNynZcjioCOvL8VIYYX3FAuXj//6mQt+3wfZRxrXhJNowInOR2DyIVMidIULEOx c/bU5Mde6SEUOznoIvEVJgymCbjO60F4ci6T3/FQ=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130618111923.0c9b9340@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:35:31 -0700
To: Abdussalam Baryun 
From: SM 
In-Reply-To: 
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: [Diversity] Who are the diversity design team (was: Making allowances for someone)
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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 18:36:41 -0000

Hi Abdussalam,
At 10:32 18-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>Who are the diversity design team and how they were chosen? Could
>others join or this team is another close team from the community?

The answer about who are the diversity design team is in the message 
I mentioned.  I'll copy the answer in here:

   Suresh Krishnan
   Kathleen Moriarty
   Narelle Clark
   Dave Crocker
   Aaron Yi Ding
   Lars Eggert
   SM
   Monique Morrow
   Hugo Salgado
   Arturo Servin
   Margaret Wasserman
   Scott Weeks

I don't know how the diversity design team was chosen.  I don't know 
why I was chosen.  From what I understand it is a closed team.

Regards,
-sm 


From surfer@mauigateway.com  Tue Jun 18 13:23:44 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 CC05E11E80BA for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:23:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.579
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.579 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, LOCALPART_IN_SUBJECT=2.02]
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 lwzdmUGEgKF3 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:23:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imta-38.everyone.net (imta-35.everyone.net [216.200.145.35]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D0C621E8092 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:23:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0004961.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by imta-38.everyone.net (8.14.5/8.14.5) with SMTP id r5IKN5Ss004238 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:24:03 -0700
X-Eon-Dm: dm23
Received: by m0005296.mta.everyone.net (EON-PICKUP) id m0005296.519edd31.3d742; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:23:21 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Message-Id: <20130618132321.D487CA83@m0005296.ppops.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:23:21 -0700
From: "Scott Weeks" 
To: 
X-Eon-Sig: AQLAznNRwMG5bE03LQEAAAAB,264fa3add9d0d00f4fbca00f86bee022
X-Originating-Ip: 75.80.217.157
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.10.8794, 1.0.431, 0.0.0000 definitions=2013-06-18_07:2013-06-18, 2013-06-18, 1970-01-01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=2 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1305240000 definitions=main-1306180203
Subject: Re: [Diversity] IETF Diversity
X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: surfer@mauigateway.com
List-Id: Diversity open mailing list 
List-Unsubscribe: , 
List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: , 
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:23:44 -0000

Brought over from the main list to reduce noise there...


Phillip Hallam-Baker  wrote:
> Minecraft was launched in 2011 and they had 4,500 people at 
> their first international conference that year, they are now 
> about to have their third. So they went from having nothing 
> to having a larger participant community than the IETF in a 
> matter of months.

Abdussalam Baryun  wrote:
:: I think that is good news, and that IETF should realise how 
:: did that happen, and realise what is wrong in IETF. I 
:: suggested before that IETF encourages participants, and gave 
:: many responses but still I was feeling ignored.


This seems easy to answer.  The bar is much lower for the
participants of a gaming conference, both in terms of learning 
the tasks at hand and in terms of worrying about saying 
something dumb in front of everyone.  The tasks at hand in the 
IETF are much more complicated, so less folks will participate
and the risks of saying something dumb in front of a 
knowledgeable group of people are higher than at a gaming 
conference and will cause folks to hesitate on participation.
I don't see a participation lesson for the IETF there...

scott













_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity



From prvs=9881919e96=suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com  Tue Jun 18 13:25:57 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 A870221F873C for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:25:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, 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 ukdXiPgbwogJ for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:25:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from usevmg21.ericsson.net (usevmg21.ericsson.net [198.24.6.65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B887E21F8717 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:25:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c6180641-b7f0e6d0000015f1-4c-51c0c24614d1
Received: from EUSAAHC002.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.78]) by usevmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 42.1A.05617.742C0C15; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 22:25:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from eusaamw0712.eamcs.ericsson.se (147.117.20.181) by EUSAAHC002.ericsson.se (147.117.188.78) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.328.9; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:25:42 -0400
Received: from [164.48.125.25] (147.117.20.214) by smtps-am.internal.ericsson.com (147.117.20.181) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.279.1; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:25:41 -0400
Message-ID: <51C0C1A4.1030207@ericsson.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:23:00 -0400
From: Suresh Krishnan 
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130404 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Abdussalam Baryun 
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net> 
In-Reply-To: 
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrHLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXSPn677oQOBBs86RC2+3Whlsrh2ewWL xfENh9gdmD12zrrL7rFkyU8mj/fdz9gCmKO4bZISS8qCM9Pz9O0SuDPW3NnMWnCKuaLnwgfG BsbnTF2MnBwSAiYSt+4fYYGwxSQu3FvPBmILCRxllDhxPamLkQvI3sMo8XzNNnYIZyujxIUD T9lBqngFtCUu/ZsD1M3BwSKgKvFweyxImA1o6Iadn8EWiAqESXxYtoQJolxQ4uTMJ2DLRASM JJb+3gK2jFlAT+LjvEuMILawgJlE59N7rBC71rBI9G97zgyS4BQIlHjf/okZ4lJJiS0v2tlh mqdcbWGEsOUltr+dwwzxgabE1jXfWScwCs9CsnsWkpZZSFoWMDKvYuQoLU4ty003MtzECAzu YxJsjjsYF3yyPMQozcGiJM77/tSuQCGB9MSS1OzU1ILUovii0pzU4kOMTBycIIJLqoExRyxm r/h60SM1Fz+0967eYH8ydc8+i0Xve35snSrxz2LVJZOWqffC27uWTIz+1Pvy7aVXZzaZihzP KX632pXZ7/23V0W7DVt8PA+dWxGpemGJ0bQz57YVG8b8lfjt1GrS7nhB/h+rd6ZVANv23c+/ +xwu3t6VeXVGlfQPqeQaLrZshujFn5wMlViKMxINtZiLihMBlRbGoUECAAA=
Cc: SM , diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone
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: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 20:25:57 -0000

Hi AB,

On 06/18/2013 01:32 PM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
> I seen that post questions, which still need time to collect my reply.
> Who are the diversity design team and how they were chosen? Could
> others join or this team is another close team from the community?

SM already posted the list of members of the diversity design team. The
team was chosen by Kathleen and me from the list of people who
volunteered to help out.

Thanks
Suresh


From adrian@olddog.co.uk  Tue Jun 18 14:47:23 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 200AC21F9A05 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:47:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.587
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.587 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.012,  BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 X+Ln4RD8YLD5 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:47:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (asmtp2.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.249]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D933521E80AE for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:46:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r5ILkktV028176;  Tue, 18 Jun 2013 22:46:49 +0100
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r5ILkj06028164 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 18 Jun 2013 22:46:46 +0100
From: "Adrian Farrel" 
To: "'SM'" 
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com>	<51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com>	<3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com>	<2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com>	<51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com>	<2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com>	<6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>		<6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>	 <6.2.5.6.2.20130618111923.0c9b9340@resistor.net>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130618111923.0c9b9340@resistor.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 22:46:44 +0100
Message-ID: <053701ce6c6d$53926060$fab72120$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQGeVJFHCfOz9XcgCT1++C+rtG3z3wKAhWSZAgwFqRYCSZni6AKLFgaQAPkAA7cC1iU/igIhz5ffAgJym+0DEci91AF976bNmO0OeNA=
Content-Language: en-gb
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Who are the diversity design team (was: Making allowances for someone)
X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
List-Id: Diversity open mailing list 
List-Unsubscribe: , 
List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: , 
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 21:47:23 -0000

> I don't know how the diversity design team was chosen.  I don't know
> why I was chosen. 

Presumably for diversity :-)'




From sm@resistor.net  Tue Jun 18 19:11:31 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 8725B11E8122 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:11:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.512
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.512 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.087, 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 WZ+uWmc4FW03 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:11:30 -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 A79DA11E80A5 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:11:30 -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 r5J2BJbQ024611; Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:11:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371607884; bh=HeLstF0YMM+3v8zSaDLMhRuSn0laMBoUukkYAfBLRak=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=zeuFid6V0aCDSMXdYKrBV8iWnSdcwFON84UfFz4thMTf0OF0V50qoazilezokinDQ 58m0b1bkHEsAdxTcZedko1z92f3pAq1I5AZKLpZtMYVBeiTC0EifHFeaa5JK1+wxax P0xLjEAM37XZvwICR7x0b3gXw3Ra7cbe2MIdsVls=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371607884; i=@resistor.net; bh=HeLstF0YMM+3v8zSaDLMhRuSn0laMBoUukkYAfBLRak=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=w3C1HqG/tckfR9YgZzH8iugDuU58vUAetecKLTBqoP7Xi0FP6+zZuGGLjYXNhzzkr 79xaY6P5QEsh33Fqu7zz5157yg0jOtjtXEeaoFedxz0WgEFKQrYKvwQOr1vp9GwWbI xnreljIMgTPWhmcidwKU7Suf4qclEm8MzMi64/KY=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130618183418.0cc768f8@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:10:26 -0700
To: Abdussalam Baryun 
From: SM 
In-Reply-To: 
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone
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: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 02:11:31 -0000

Hi Abdussalam,
At 10:32 18-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>OK, usually we now have two Chairs (what chairs role in WG, and what
>they can do?), but they are mostly from same region, they are not
>familiar with different markets/needs in different regions. How do
>they adopt/encourage new work in IETF from the Internet community?

The WG Chairs work under the direction of an Area Director.  I would 
described the work as  ensuring that the discussions falls within the 
scope of the WG Chair.  What the WG Chairs can do is specified in the 
BCPs.  The WG Chairs usually ask the working group whether it would 
like to adopt a draft if that work is within the scope of the charter.

Regards,
-sm


From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Wed Jun 19 01:29:36 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 EE74221F9F9A for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 01:29:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.552
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.552 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.048,  BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 h5GwKFWxtn8J for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 01:29:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x22e.google.com (mail-pa0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72A3221F9F98 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 01:29:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id fa11so4890335pad.5 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 01:29:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=InUyPMkjIPL88a9B/SDio9GbcuCFqJ9/Hh4AbLwSpEk=; b=jvuMYJ74b4obI2gKqIbpN7d8zE3qYtp7g1pCoY3r8KA2PWfz6APMlOJQ8RVtHcxhNH BmTRmE5fEIh6+sohxtBi/nhBe4GLS018r519AkgjNASTHi8rnhyk5DXy8gpT/aeoUbqJ OMhXhJ4D37ptGmPQE1bVRQlNvX+IDIMRt9VH0o+yjFs+W5K6Ie/T8ooTwRH7+zjhppaf bLyb9N2PndXO/B/HNuYgfTM71Z4/8/a+3/nQt+TM56tVVCRJTTYdWW4hMXMKCvWScPI4 tnIMsAxcH+VIm6sQLJUNwAe6xJDL4Zv8XTpY+3E8RJCVVkpj3YmstoHmrheuGG3WZ3ov z/Yg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.66.7.164 with SMTP id k4mr5722896paa.142.1371630576135; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 01:29:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 01:29:36 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130618111923.0c9b9340@resistor.net>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618111923.0c9b9340@resistor.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:29:36 +0200
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: SM 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Who are the diversity design team (was: Making allowances for someone)
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: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 08:29:37 -0000

Hi SM,

Thanks for your help. So if the close-team work are closed could we
know where the plan/design got to, or what is the process end date, or
what will be expected in coming three months, or what are the
milestones if available? I think this will help in my suggestions for
the team.

On 6/18/13, SM  wrote:
> Hi Abdussalam,
> At 10:32 18-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>>Who are the diversity design team and how they were chosen? Could
>>others join or this team is another close team from the community?
>
> The answer about who are the diversity design team is in the message
> I mentioned.

Yes was mentioned/read but not understood how, but its ok I am use to not know.

However I will answer the questionnairs,

> I'll copy the answer in here:
>
>    Suresh Krishnan
>    Kathleen Moriarty
>    Narelle Clark
>    Dave Crocker
>    Aaron Yi Ding
>    Lars Eggert
>    SM
>    Monique Morrow
>    Hugo Salgado
>    Arturo Servin
>    Margaret Wasserman
>    Scott Weeks
>
> I don't know how the diversity design team was chosen.  I don't know
> why I was chosen.  From what I understand it is a closed team.

Thanks, I wish you all the best,

AB

From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Wed Jun 19 01:38:10 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 ED4C421F9F84 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 01:38:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.554
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.554 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.046,  BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 L9O+X+zy+lOR for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 01:38:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-x22b.google.com (mail-pb0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DB6721F9F83 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 01:38:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f43.google.com with SMTP id md12so4842820pbc.2 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 01:38:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Ojz8iGr4O1IDEbXAo15CVAK2UmzxelitKQuKDOaQstM=; b=JEdiaLL/0/MJrCdYi1e1x7cMBS90RQu0C8KHP1s6wt0uYrPjyWy44Cw1tIsOvDV/iH CmZ6Z/jEiC/91YjSPModPR4Jg50xHZmuFkHJosa3jWexryIKBkU2SH571YnVHxARsb4Z f31kT3NNRy8uxa0mKtCp5ctOqD8UkoiKIkMyYciHVIVikJO7RIeGDZl2Mc211gH3hyjx TwjGsdRlaKi7TU2G2u6l/lGIp/jBr4Fbyjd+4x2c3MDkA4ofLi0DXnfzxMwkcv7QFmU+ OQXhoFI5mo3ZiyQPYDQJfjGPlk1Wj6aYmeoilsFmrxaXCJMSekX3lCPsc2NexNOEt2Bm cVSw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.66.230.199 with SMTP id ta7mr5809616pac.153.1371631090279; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 01:38:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 01:38:10 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130618183418.0cc768f8@resistor.net>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618183418.0cc768f8@resistor.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:38:10 +0200
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: SM 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone
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: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 08:38:11 -0000

Hi SM,

thanks, comments below,

On 6/19/13, SM  wrote:
> Hi Abdussalam,
> At 10:32 18-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>>OK, usually we now have two Chairs (what chairs role in WG, and what
>>they can do?), but they are mostly from same region, they are not
>>familiar with different markets/needs in different regions. How do
>>they adopt/encourage new work in IETF from the Internet community?
>
> The WG Chairs work under the direction of an Area Director.  I would
> described the work as  ensuring that the discussions falls within the
> scope of the WG Chair.  What the WG Chairs can do is specified in the
> BCPs.  The WG Chairs usually ask the working group whether it would
> like to adopt a draft if that work is within the scope of the charter.

Yes my questions was to open an eye on diversity of the IETF
procedure/BCP. Sometimes I understood that the Chair is able to adopt
documents for the WG, without asking others, and he/she may refuse
adopting as a participant. IMHO, the way of adopting documents SHOULD
be diversified.

AB

From adrian@olddog.co.uk  Wed Jun 19 03:16:40 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 EF10D21F9D4D for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 03:16:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.587
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.587 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.012,  BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 9XKR2zO7oDG5 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 03:16:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9161021F9D92 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 03:16:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r5JAGVKb005819;  Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:16:31 +0100
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r5JAGSeF005809 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:16:28 +0100
From: "Adrian Farrel" 
To: "'Abdussalam Baryun'" 
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com>	<51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com>	<3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com>	<2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com>	<51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com>	<2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com>	<6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>		<6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>		<6.2.5.6.2.20130618183418.0cc768f8@resistor.net> 
In-Reply-To: 
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:16:27 +0100
Message-ID: <05dc01ce6cd6$10df8bd0$329ea370$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQGeVJFHCfOz9XcgCT1++C+rtG3z3wKAhWSZAgwFqRYCSZni6AKLFgaQAPkAA7cC1iU/igIhz5ffAgJym+0DEci91AJtmhTyAq5azY2Y0O3lUA==
Content-Language: en-gb
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Making allowances for someone
X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
List-Id: Diversity open mailing list 
List-Unsubscribe: , 
List-Archive: 
List-Post: 
List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: , 
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:16:40 -0000

> Yes my questions was to open an eye on diversity of the IETF
> procedure/BCP. Sometimes I understood that the Chair is able to adopt
> documents for the WG, without asking others, and he/she may refuse
> adopting as a participant. IMHO, the way of adopting documents SHOULD
> be diversified.

See http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-crocker-id-adoption/ which is intended
to describe the way things are not the way we might like them to be.

But I don't understand "the way of adopting documents SHOULD be diversified."
Do you mean that we should allow the adoption of work that is not in scope of
the WG charter?
Do you mean we should allow the adoption of work when there is not a clearly
identified group of people willing to do the work and interested in seeing
implementation/deployment?
Do you mean that we should adopt drafts when the consensus of the working group
is that the idea is broken, unnecessary, or dangerous?

I am struggling to see where "diversity" comes into the equation unless you are
suggesting that adoption of drafts is currently being blocked (consciously or
subconsciously) because of certain characteristics of the authors rather than
because of the content of the drafts. If this was the case, do you think that
the right answer is allow I-ds through diversity, or should we have blind
reviews? (I am not saying that blind reviews are necessarily practical, but they
would surely remove the risk of any prejudice based on non-relevant author
attributes.)

Adrian


From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Wed Jun 19 04:13:26 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 38C0F21F9C15 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 04:13:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.555
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.555 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.045,  BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 H6VznvXftV8M for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 04:13:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x234.google.com (mail-pa0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DB6821F944C for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 04:13:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id kq13so5047793pab.39 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 04:13:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Nk/q7NkUql5l/5suSqC+tOUdOd/cKHVSDx6RIqlezr4=; b=y6CEEp+OJfUrSPVY/lpo97NB4xXD/gTBNREy7bdmIKS5hecR5a6H6SKSsUzO/D0sPp h92c92E9LyQHf7/HC/t/ykvLCXDKMTmREVOQwXFKzSQeKZVrEXf/GATxt58yiwPUToed pDB/ENwtNXKm2J88wxwNJn2XkxNMK8ynvxTwN2ds5TuyiE650q6odI/nBRjgEWW0G2ht K6VSEp0Pn0G+Cuo94j3rarCrguVH7hNz4jzjukVu3+GF8JUERzARZuSfRYqqvp+7KQes PAz0hgSBCObytMcOMhgUxBGOFPvuk+dW2eoFlwGNKfaNLBuIV39SOgOokehFWHtulrjC jxFw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.68.219.42 with SMTP id pl10mr2386091pbc.24.1371640404714; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 04:13:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 04:13:24 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 13:13:24 +0200
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: [Diversity] Diversity in IETF's Adopted Jobs/Works (was Re: Making allowances for someone)
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: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:13:26 -0000

On 6/19/13, Adrian Farrel  wrote:
>> Yes my questions was to open an eye on diversity of the IETF
>> procedure/BCP. Sometimes I understood that the Chair is able to adopt
>> documents for the WG, without asking others, and he/she may refuse
>> adopting as a participant. IMHO, the way of adopting documents SHOULD
>> be diversified.
>
> See http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-crocker-id-adoption/ which is
> intended
> to describe the way things are not the way we might like them to be.
>
> But I don't understand "the way of adopting documents SHOULD be
> diversified."

The participation in IETF is wanted to be diversified, so then we have
a team design for diversity. Our work and workers both need diversity,
not only workers, this is the equation;

Diversity Performance of IETF = Diversity in participation/(dominated
region participants) + Diversity in IETF adopted works/ (dominated
region documents)

> Do you mean that we should allow the adoption of work that is not in scope
> of
> the WG charter?

No never ment that, I want scope, and diversity SHOULD be in scope of
ALL WG, Do you mean that Diversity in the workers of WG SHOULD NOT be
in scope of WG adoptions or concerns?

> Do you mean we should allow the adoption of work when there is not a
> clearly
> identified group of people willing to do the work and interested in seeing
> implementation/deployment?

Never ment that we ignore identifications/engineering-reasons, but we
SHOULD not ignore that most of OUR WGs are not with high diversity in
participations.

> Do you mean that we should adopt drafts when the consensus of the working
> group
> is that the idea is broken, unnecessary, or dangerous?

Never ment that, I like consensus, but we SHOULD consider consensus of
world regions not dominated ones, and don't ignore that there are many
listening but don't participate for some private reason. The way
consensus is practiced in adoptions in IETF may not be following the
IETF vision.

>
> I am struggling to see where "diversity" comes into the equation

Diversity Performance of IETF = Diversity in participation/(dominated
region participants) + Diversity in IETF adopted works/ (dominated
region documents)

If there is good reasons of opposing and agreeing on one I-D to be
adopted then consensus is reasonable (Diversity is not in the equation
of adoption).

If there was no good reason for opposing adoption, then the chair
SHOLD adopt the I-D (Diversity is in the equation or Diversity SHOULD
be considered).

> unless you
> are
> suggesting that adoption of drafts is currently being blocked (consciously
> or
> subconsciously) because of certain characteristics of the authors rather
> than
> because of the content of the drafts.

Not suggesting, just commenting on the diversity list for more
consideration of *document adoption* into this design team work.

> If this was the case, do you think
> that
> the right answer is allow I-ds through diversity, or should we have blind
> reviews? (I am not saying that blind reviews are necessarily practical, but
> they
> would surely remove the risk of any prejudice based on non-relevant author
> attributes.)

We need diversity in IETF Editors (not authors), we need diversity in
reviewers (reviewers with different ages, woman, men, different region
review, etc.). I don't like blind work, we need to have diversity in
management and in participation and in reviews and in editings and in
WGs, chairs, and in IESG, and in documents.

Authors don't have to be diversified (I never care who are the
authors, but who adopted the work and why) because usually they mostly
come together to do a work and then they ask a WG to adopt it. The
editors of that adopted work SHOULD be diversified for the best
practice. The IETF owns the adopted-document not only the authors.

AB

From sm@resistor.net  Wed Jun 19 11:43:32 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 4C80821F93DA for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:43:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.515
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.515 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.084, 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 O49Y1PIaXcJE for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:43:31 -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 A680721F9935 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:43:30 -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 r5JIhAbk017663; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371667399; bh=/Uyj4Z7svFI9CCgg2iD4QBq1yp0+CGFdLd4ZN3TQhk0=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=SOmIcgA0L8QqenIfw2zY/VQ6B/p+/Tvo4Wg+vXvb7MKrl2APNnK1mS2ad1Y1DkQPw oJhOh23S26lGq7CgZe6ZudKm9a7KHa1qok0ga8ViQ9oZjdUky1Cyy7zhG+ULC+N6sf V8uNtPGNWRfbgIfK8aBLamlO+sfq90+2Int992+U=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371667399; i=@resistor.net; bh=/Uyj4Z7svFI9CCgg2iD4QBq1yp0+CGFdLd4ZN3TQhk0=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=dGAm7Yj3KiMKFYkcEU4OuITNS0LRYSkX6PZMEyZc+MrGjXz24iu2VbRydU/1/IYvm TxR5vHcOyLUW3tA7ceDBAiDBoAnUUwUpbU5jIBolsL0wSIYCaGN5NoVCO3gPcR8Fl6 7SMT3A6QAMnSIS9PN6GjTyMqChPIVVvU+0JtHqKY=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130619112906.0cab9240@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:42:07 -0700
To: Doug Barton 
From: SM 
In-Reply-To: <51C1F592.1060708@dougbarton.us>
References: <51C09437.5040006@stpeter.im>   <51C14C06.1060207@cs.helsinki.fi>  <2t0xiMKNOIudTjLczEne-KxRYX9oK6AXs7ljHaaAhiRgAJ7bs@smtp.gmail.com> <51C1CB4D.4030006@stpeter.im> <51C1CCCB.3060601@gmail.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751E0DC6@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <51C1F277.8050902@dougbarton.us> <51C1F45E.2030805@gmail.com> <51C1F592.1060708@dougbarton.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: diversity@ietf.org, Melinda Shore 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] IETF Diversity
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: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:43:32 -0000

Hi Doug,
At 11:16 19-06-2013, Doug Barton wrote:
>It's not clear to me how this example relates to the IETF.

The majority of people on the IETF Secretariat are women.  The 
majority of Area Directors are men.

>... and while we're on that topic, what are you doing to help?

I peer with a few people.  I don't think I am doing it correctly as I 
have not been spending as much time as I should on that.  Please note 
that I do not consider the messages I post about diversity 
discussions as helping as it is not a concrete action to me.

Regards,
-sm 


From sm@resistor.net  Wed Jun 19 11:43:32 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 5915121F9A99 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:43:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.518
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.518 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.081, 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 Yl-1WCoo-+0o for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:43:31 -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 A688021F997F for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:43:30 -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 r5JIhAbi017663; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:43:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371667395; bh=ysEfpx30pb4bjV1oZ72WhHhRnG6NrT1aHeSiL65MXAY=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=Elh5NMJC8W5hJFNSRwUb4UvsLzXU/yjwNnnCPaGjKMod0F3N6RTQybXjFxHCCg5v0 CRQibn8iU+79HWEQJYfwhwV2ne+jVKyQY655Ai3Mm461Tq9qzUNRQBUhRkz2zLHrs0 mhJ8OqhvtxIk8oL9iaAs0zC73mEfDvijjh3I1XHM=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371667395; i=@resistor.net; bh=ysEfpx30pb4bjV1oZ72WhHhRnG6NrT1aHeSiL65MXAY=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=wMCipSaVgBRRhqTsp+u2//algAzipisuKDR+0Xut2eTckJ8oHVochQTxPaAIDWadC CqW/y0QDUJ7pl9CEmTXyDrKd3oGKmTET6XqyKuXV3nhYr2O+Su9NFMY8JYhfsjWfgX AsHGHEdqzAHPayMUGyAgo3hGeU3hHJ/Qi3OK4NZo=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130619110829.0cab9c80@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:26:41 -0700
To: Abdussalam Baryun 
From: SM 
In-Reply-To: 
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618111923.0c9b9340@resistor.net> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Who are the diversity design team (was: Making allowances for someone)
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: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:43:32 -0000

Hi Abdussalam,
At 01:29 19-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>Thanks for your help. So if the close-team work are closed could we
>know where the plan/design got to, or what is the process end date, or
>what will be expected in coming three months, or what are the
>milestones if available? I think this will help in my suggestions for
>the team.

There was the message about a call for input.  There isn't any plan 
or design.  There isn't a process end date.  There aren't any milestones.

It's difficult to know what to expect within the next three 
months.  If the people interested in diversity suggest concrete 
actions it will be easier to discuss the matter on the diversity 
mailing list.  If the people interested in diversity do not suggest 
concrete actions I would not expect much.

Regards,
-sm 


From yding@cs.helsinki.fi  Wed Jun 19 12:14:25 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 6D2AC21F9FF3 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 12:14:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.556
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.556 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.043,  BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 4NfLIpI2Od3H for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 12:14:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from courier.cs.helsinki.fi (courier.cs.helsinki.fi [128.214.9.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2E0221F9FEF for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 12:14:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-DKIM: Courier DKIM Filter v0.50+pk-2013-06-17 courier.cs.helsinki.fi Wed Jun 19 22:14:04 2013
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cs.helsinki.fi; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= dkim20130528; bh=7vVKAjrgd5Gvb/2+r7ta4wjlrwO66uAOW136iHOMZqs=; b= WrJs1/LeIc3VDTHIaxzYF2AaUVT2F0VW3bLs5HYEWGhbdc+lSfem/RrFgBNjKPgo nyWkPufMuM+Wo5/lcFu3xOWpUqegyhFs+XGJsXVQRcOy6pki243nIMp8AlD9327o v0SlN5d+6/TYm6rr2fptgA4P6TxoXSlWhQpr5k+dfCk=
Received: from [192.168.93.100] (host-94-101-2-100.igua.fi [94.101.2.100]) (AUTH: PLAIN yding, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by mail.cs.helsinki.fi with esmtp; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 22:14:04 +0300 id 00068086.51C202FC.00004749
Message-ID: <51C202FC.2000409@cs.helsinki.fi>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 22:14:04 +0300
From: Aaron Yi DING 
Organization: Helsinki University
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: SM 
References: <51C09437.5040006@stpeter.im>   <51C14C06.1060207@cs.helsinki.fi>  <2t0xiMKNOIudTjLczEne-KxRYX9oK6AXs7ljHaaAhiRgAJ7bs@smtp.gmail.com> <51C1CB4D.4030006@stpeter.im> <51C1CCCB.3060601@gmail.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751E0DC6@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <51C1F277.8050902@dougbarton.us> <51C1F45E.2030805@gmail.com> <51C1F592.1060708@dougbarton.us> <6.2.5.6.2.20130619112906.0cab9240@resistor.net>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130619112906.0cab9240@resistor.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: diversity@ietf.org, Melinda Shore 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] IETF Diversity
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: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 19:14:25 -0000

On 19/06/13 21:42, SM wrote:
> Hi Doug,
> At 11:16 19-06-2013, Doug Barton wrote:
>> It's not clear to me how this example relates to the IETF.
>
> The majority of people on the IETF Secretariat are women.  The 
> majority of Area Directors are men.
>

Again, IF the underlying assumption of such statement is IETF ADs are 
more noble than the IETF Secretariat, please stop now from going down 
the humiliating/snobbery path.

IF not, let's calm down somewhat to figure out what possible concrete 
actions can be done here to improve, rather than throwing emotional 
arrows here and there.

Reading the discussion mails is a serious contribution because we all 
contribute our most precious resource - TIME. and therefore thanks for 
the participants who even reach here :)

Regards,
Aaron


>> ... and while we're on that topic, what are you doing to help?
>
> I peer with a few people.  I don't think I am doing it correctly as I 
> have not been spending as much time as I should on that. Please note 
> that I do not consider the messages I post about diversity discussions 
> as helping as it is not a concrete action to me.
>
> Regards,
> -sm
> _______________________________________________
> diversity mailing list
> diversity@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity


From sm@resistor.net  Wed Jun 19 13:31:00 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 6278C21F9AF5 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 13:31:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.514
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.514 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.085, 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 bokDvHKJqW8j for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 13:30:59 -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 908C421F9B00 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 13:30:59 -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 r5JKUhJX025124; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 13:30:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371673849; bh=EKmnohniOW77IEAgmLSI2cy5YHduDFriOi5g3j7cBgo=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=wcaQ3dgYiJ3tg5cpW1+PcOGgYijbpLzh1Ohm4VbWP1jFdWru17745cPslGnetJXIZ G0Thu5cV6VEQ5zE1bJgn2bTrDjqhJyvcmvDkIWUFl1dAYqlohHBx6dWjxJUQ5fkIuH KJWI9ul84hmxuqXf3U5cq5Bg5YWWZ4R2JiSP5ENw=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371673849; i=@resistor.net; bh=EKmnohniOW77IEAgmLSI2cy5YHduDFriOi5g3j7cBgo=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=zgYCNygUQgUSVakgWVUeRCdAja/N1Fqp0CXi/T44msnSuz7cd/upw80PWEeKkXN2A 3YaVhIYkYOkIEF8I9t3/vh/UiKOkYUk1DCXOVH0CClT14UJEibemTwsKhcchjRF/lI XPvnKA7JcCscnXJQo+2Cb+dbbcYNCfFTgL1Ow1nE=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130619122707.0cb74290@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 13:14:22 -0700
To: Doug Barton 
From: SM 
In-Reply-To: <51C204E6.207@dougbarton.us>
References: <51C09437.5040006@stpeter.im>   <51C14C06.1060207@cs.helsinki.fi>  <2t0xiMKNOIudTjLczEne-KxRYX9oK6AXs7ljHaaAhiRgAJ7bs@smtp.gmail.com> <51C1CB4D.4030006@stpeter.im> <51C1CCCB.3060601@gmail.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751E0DC6@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <51C1F277.8050902@dougbarton.us> <51C1F45E.2030805@gmail.com> <51C1F592.1060708@dougbarton.us> <6.2.5.6.2.20130619112906.0cab9240@resistor.net> <51C204E6.207@dougbarton.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: diversity@ietf.org, Melinda Shore 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] IETF Diversity
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: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 20:31:00 -0000

Hi Doug,
At 12:22 19-06-2013, Doug Barton wrote:
>And what does that have to do with anything? That's a serious 
>question, BTW, the 2 things you described bear little if any relationship.

If I start doing comparisons I can compare two things which bear 
little or no relationship to make my point.  It may generate 
emotional responses.

My understanding of what the women are saying is that:

  (i)  The IETF is not a place for women as there are very few women around.

  (ii) Most people who succeed in the IETF are men as I see that all the
       Area Directors are men.

>The more interesting questions are whether or not the current makeup 
>of the IETF leadership is reflective of the population (nee 
>"membership") of the IETF as a whole; and whether or not the IETF 
>population reflects the larger population of the tech community it 
>draws from. Those are problems that outreach, mentorship, etc. can 
>make concrete impacts on.

Yes.

>... and all that is completely aside from the fact that I've yet to 
>see a clear explanation of what "the diversity problem" is. Someone 
>else pointed out very early in the process that the IETF way of 
>doing things is to jump immediately into the solution space. I don't 
>see that this issue is being handled any differently than that.

I don't have a description for "the diversity problem".  There are 
too many interconnected problems.  I don't think that the IETF way of 
doing things would work out well.

>Oh and BTW, the majority of the RSE staff are women, but for the 
>majority of the existence of that organization it was headed by a 
>woman. How does that affect your analysis?

I should stop annoying the RSE staff. :-)

Regards,
-sm 


From yding@cs.helsinki.fi  Wed Jun 19 15:58:12 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 6A38D21F9DF2; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:58:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.566
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.033,  BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 45I9tiGRpeY0; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:58:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from courier.cs.helsinki.fi (courier.cs.helsinki.fi [128.214.9.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F27E621F9733; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:58:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-DKIM: Courier DKIM Filter v0.50+pk-2013-06-17 courier.cs.helsinki.fi Thu Jun 20 01:57:50 2013
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cs.helsinki.fi; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= dkim20130528; bh=FdadBp+76uYLOaIYe5/YXa+XJtU0qITjUyqfPODrXGg=; b= c2Wg0lDTN6ejPQ5wM7bcUoroFfiRHlu7IZUjAbprGjw9YKOGBOcvJofAXG8GlA6j 9LH2btufEjkeh7BzMiBtntfK6ofjlTdtYseVpiVe8i/DMA2S5Cnls0e0QD5gYuVY eKGRPuLPZTAK8egd4Cc3xKrg79/EH71Yat2oUnBAsvA=
Received: from [192.168.93.100] (host-94-101-2-100.igua.fi [94.101.2.100]) (AUTH: PLAIN yding, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by mail.cs.helsinki.fi with esmtp; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 01:57:50 +0300 id 00068086.51C2376E.00006CC5
Message-ID: <51C2376E.80400@cs.helsinki.fi>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 01:57:50 +0300
From: Aaron Yi DING 
Organization: Helsinki University
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "" , "" 
References: <51C09437.5040006@stpeter.im>   <51C14C06.1060207@cs.helsinki.fi>  <2t0xiMKNOIudTjLczEne-KxRYX9oK6AXs7ljHaaAhiRgAJ7bs@smtp.gmail.com> <51C1C0E1.8000900@dcrocker.net> <51C1C980.6000606@stpeter.im> <51C1CD95.4060106@innovationslab.net> 
In-Reply-To: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Diversity] IETF Diversity vs. White Male ??
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: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 22:58:12 -0000

On 19/06/13 22:56, Yoav Nir wrote:
> On Jun 19, 2013, at 6:26 PM, Brian Haberman  wrote:
>
>> To help facilitate the mentoring aspect, there will be a call soon for volunteers to act as mentors for newcomers (starting with IETF 87). Once the web page for the mentoring program with all the information is up, you should be seeing a call for mentors.
>>
>> We hope that this type of program will aid in assisting newer members of the IETF community become more involved and productive in our activities.
> This may be helpful in getting first-time attendees to stay on with the IETF. That is a laudable goal in itself, but I'm not sure if it will help diversity. Just bringing in new white male employees of US router companies will not increase diversity. It might work if the pool of newcomers is considerably more diverse than the pool of veterans, but having been in the last two meet-and-greets, I see a lot of the same, except that the newcomer group has more people from China. I see few women, hardly any Africans (from Africa or the US), and not a lot of company names I recognize as operators.
>



There is one observation puzzled me, and it will be good to hear from 
the community, sort of like 'request for comments'.  Part of it is based 
on the previous IETF panel discussions plus all sorts of mails from ietf 
related lists.

By following our diversity discussions so far, the term "white male" 
seems to be cited rather frequently and most of time with some kind of 
emotions attached to it, e.g. dominant, power, monopoly etc.  To be 
honest, I do have a mixed feeling when encountering such KEY WORD in a 
public speech or along the lines of mail. That feeling resembles very 
much when I heard Chinese being associated with minority, passive, 
reserved or even, communist ...

I understand the term "black" is not friendly to mention in US, but 
seriously, is the other term WHITE now being so freely used as such, 
especially in IETF, not even a slight concern? Just because the 
tolerance level among the white male group is already so high that no 
one really cares about it anymore? or just because currently IETF 
engineers tagged with white male background are found in most 
management/leadership slots so that it is easier to draw some kind of 
hatred feeling or recognition from the under-present group who have 
being pressed for so long? Sometimes it is quite hard to distinguish the 
intention of such, being considerate and thoughtful for the healthy 
development of our community, or just to fit in certain group's craving 
for the taste of the throne (here I don't target at any specific person, 
seriously)

One visible flaw is that to wire the "white male" up against diversity 
in IETF is largely irrelevant to the topic itself. This is in large a 
stereotype. Like currently there are so many Chinese living 
permanently/grow up in America, Europe and Asia. The "white male" are 
similarly not just from or living/working in the US, there are so many I 
know actually are living outside, oh well, definitely covering EU, and 
in many Asian areas, Japan, Korea, Singapore, and in major Chinese 
cities like Shanghai and Hong Kong. They definitely can understand and 
appreciate the culture differences in terms of working and 
communications, which are most relevant to the IETF functionality.

The more relevant thing here is that what do we actually want? Would it 
be that we need more diverse participation from the globe which in the 
end maximize the output and impact of IETF? Right now our white male 
engineers are put on the front line to be 'scrutinized' under the 
'diversity' microscope, what if a couple years later, the trend shifts 
to Asians? or Latin America or Australians or Africans. Sorry, I really 
try to avoid the skin color or gender here, because I personally believe 
it is essentially off the topic of the whole IETF diversity thing we 
shall focus on.

As the title hinted, really hope the goal of this diversity movement 
does not end up into against or wiping out "white male" from IETF, just 
because people 'firmly' believe they are the ones controlling the whole 
scene and resources, and won't let it go unless a revolution is called 
upon (btw, does it sound similar to many others demanding a radical 
revolution to the existing Chinese dominant 'group'? :)

Well, if the dominant ones later being replaced by other groups, do we 
need to revamp again? What will be the end?


Thanks, particularly for tolerating such long mail,
Aaron

From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Wed Jun 19 16:44:07 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 91A6821F9EC9 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:44:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.078
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.078 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.521,  BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 GvH9OY-eilqJ for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:44:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pd0-f176.google.com (mail-pd0-f176.google.com [209.85.192.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 423C121F9EA8 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:44:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pd0-f176.google.com with SMTP id t12so5554160pdi.7 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:44:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=J5z6eyvSZ+7THT2nVKJ1B2P4rg3Uop92c4TM2YYF+Zk=; b=aZwA3WVlRkQPlXe4p9sm+zcTzh/+G76YyZDP0x3ARzyrc5ybEBCUiIPZ4vlaeoQ105 7/VOBG+NBVcoe+9nP77H78XZzZK0UYHT8YPk7fto4QQ7I4Swq/x3PCmGLI6P24cbeRn4 2pkR8gsM2uAUSB1NiPJLjMTaOlNhT/5fjbnMNdaAxW0I8Vtog5Uqp7fIZIwTRI4BpnQL RrswvZs+DQzGdVVMD8rtEIpPN4MIDRYB5xtVtpXhGnyNbb0IzYxsIIKweoORyyEtVMjs 8wZUUhQ8TyXkV0yN3lxXvZnMcDeaBuhjjHGLfMLWwvub1MgPIY9BAErdPrEJvtLSCTgi cjgw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.68.183.194 with SMTP id eo2mr4959310pbc.43.1371685443011; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:44:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:44:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 01:44:02 +0200
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: Suresh Krishnan 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity: Call for community input
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: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 23:44:07 -0000

Hi Suresh,

I thank you for you post regarding this call for feedback/input from
community, but I also need some details from the team so I will be
able to send best of my comments.

I need to know if possible:

1) What is the team outputs, and will they report to us what will
happen, or the team are reporting to someone (unknown)?
2) What are the milestons tasks/dates? If no milestones then why teaming?
3) What is your methodology of collecting feedback from community? Are
you taking feedback from the list only, or you have added other
channels?

In below are some answers to the call;

On 6/17/13, Suresh Krishnan  wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The diversity design team is working on mechanisms to increase
> the range of perspectives within the IETF, while maintaining high
> standards of quality.
>
> Our goal is to help improve the composition and dynamic of the
> IETF, by finding ways to incorporate a wide range of perspectives
> within the IETF, and specifically in the IETF management teams.

So you are in contact with ietf management, which is good.

> One way of achieving this is to ensure that participants differ
> along many different personal, social, and professional
> attributes. The expectation is that the greater range of
> perspectives leads to considering issues more deeply and with
> more sensitivity.

I support that idea,
>
> Community feedback is the most important input that helps us
> determine the aspects are currently working well in the IETF in
> this regard and those that are not. We cannot properly execute
> the task of proposing new mechanisms or modifying existing
> mechanisms to further these goals without **your** participation
> and feedback.

I did many participation on the ietf list, but did you collect my
ideas and contributions, (I will try to collect them and summaries in
other new reply)

>
> We would like to help the IETF management make choices that
> maximize the IETF's ability to include and encourage all
> interested participants, and maximize their contributions to IETF
> work.

I try many time to do that, but sometimes management are busy, seems
like the load is high and tools are not.

>
> On that basis, we are seeking input from people based on their
> personal experiences about
>
> * actions and activities that have worked well to improve the
>   inclusiveness of the IETF process

I find the ADs in the IETF very active, reply friendly, and are able
to solve problems of community.

>
> * actions and activitiets that have not worked well to improve
>   the inclusiveness of the IETF process

The WG Chairs are not much active with remote participants in some WGs.

More answer in stories:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/diversity/current/msg00082.html

>
> * actions and activities that have worked *against* inclusiveness
>   of the IETF process

I was excluded by editors to be acknowledged in some documents while I
made efforts to give feedback to IETF. Many in IETF use other people
ideas without considering references. I prepared work in IETF but was
discouraged to continue.

AB

From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Wed Jun 19 17:02:07 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 C2EED21F9E78 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.55
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050,  BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 x+9wXN2K5kFK for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:02:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-x230.google.com (mail-pb0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A742221F9E69 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:02:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f48.google.com with SMTP id ma3so5589830pbc.35 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:02:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=twBQT6z4MnLuw4NoXRhRQfoejclOMS/C7NDiODPZUyw=; b=e/z6etN/SE10lbv/UrZOvJsXNvpwadFWEuqdjumP4HWV2e6T5T8BCd77MMxF8Mp7AL YqIR4ZWQEJx2p4toCrGmklCwOdIpvm+WTBbLhpZvQSL8PphV8lplHvqHVvyRDyHIOFvK T91s34mobms61tdJ2J6v8MQQGLvwx9yUJYDvPT1bPxMMMblxddjixjqVFFJf/VTbkjTu ncGai/Oa6CvEeWfkLajw9SvCOj+uMVpZwLDrfT3I6aaQ6J3/m6sB5U6V0UKnKI0be17F gatMMXCx6tPznpT5adqBQAPPS4q9iyEcIikYf6kwTV/x5sMzAVHbQdflP1WDBC1S2p6g zHAA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.68.52.10 with SMTP id p10mr5071495pbo.92.1371686525411; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:02:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:02:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130619110829.0cab9c80@resistor.net>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618111923.0c9b9340@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130619110829.0cab9c80@resistor.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 02:02:05 +0200
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: SM 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Who are the diversity design team (was: Making allowances for someone)
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, 20 Jun 2013 00:02:07 -0000

Hi SM

I suggest someone SHOULD report each month what is the summaries of
discussions on the list.

comments below

On 6/19/13, SM  wrote:
> Hi Abdussalam,
> At 01:29 19-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>>Thanks for your help. So if the close-team work are closed could we
>>know where the plan/design got to, or what is the process end date, or
>>what will be expected in coming three months, or what are the
>>milestones if available? I think this will help in my suggestions for
>>the team.
>
> There was the message about a call for input.  There isn't any plan
> or design.  There isn't a process end date.  There aren't any milestones.
>

Ok the message is good start, but why does not the team discuss
issues. What is the team doing, or why they are teaming if no plan? Ok
if no design, why it was named design team? ok if no milestone, do you
think this team will get successful results? I think my suggestion is
to make a plan and milestone otherwise the community will feel there
is no seriuos team.

> It's difficult to know what to expect within the next three
> months.

I know that for teams that wait, they will not know what is coming,

>  If the people interested in diversity suggest concrete
> actions it will be easier to discuss the matter on the diversity
> mailing list.

Yes, discussing is good start, I agree. I suggested many solutions on
the ietf list. There was ignorance from IETF (I did not receive much).

>  If the people interested in diversity do not suggest
> concrete actions I would not expect much.

IMHO, people already suggested, but did IETF listen or did the team
summaries them. I think you may not expect much because the team are
not doing much or they are not discussing much. Why some people did
not choose me in the team or a team of people discussing the issue?
Then I think you will expect more,

AB

From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Wed Jun 19 17:15:59 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 2F2D721F9A6B for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:15:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.552
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.552 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.048,  BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 9FVpUqwaOHYJ for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:15:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-x231.google.com (mail-we0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27A9321F9A64 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:15:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f177.google.com with SMTP id m19so4776980wev.8 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:15:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=f9tDi7q2BT6YG/bUG86a10AykjAkCnROs05ZoMLAPNA=; b=Xb0sUB7LxA6UFEetJYdqVhSrmYPOhSRQ9HTmipy4I2eIFVTa/eSQerwleXp0IVvtLM WbCVrdz8my7QZgs+lF7DRv5SHElU/3jTlbALRXjoj3KUPncZTnTnWMHo/cFrPXeCLKue uO7xmyOEbwDxrsxRO8UI+zzA3VOQfzPcZx8F+uIuPx5ImymRH+48W8e0MU/x8C8Ljtqx /SopCXNBJhegsYlsotXyaudG8vq0EQSN0GfVZ3L7qIcFNgLrzpVJp/eAgPUsT3ORTE4K I6UicpzU2gE1Bs4aqft9ofThXAQmCFilHzPYdSbx1jeAYmMfviYp+U1u+Tc2jG33bPgw cuRg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.38.37 with SMTP id d5mr12697719wik.37.1371687356159; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:15:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.188.48 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:15:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 02:15:56 +0200
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: "diversity@ietf.org" 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity in IETF's Adopted Jobs/Works (was Re: Making allowances for someone)
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, 20 Jun 2013 00:15:59 -0000

> Authors don't have to be diversified (I never care who are the
> authors, but who adopted the work and why) because usually they mostly
> come together to do a work and then they ask a WG to adopt it. The
> editors of that adopted work SHOULD be diversified for the best
> practice. The IETF owns the adopted-document not only the authors.

IETF Jobs/title/hats: ADs, WG Chair, WG Editor, etc.
IETF documents/drafts: Adopted I-Ds, RFCs, etc.

I suggest make diversity in both Jobs and documents, so we should not
limit the number of jobs or number of participants assigned to same
job title.

AB

From sm@resistor.net  Wed Jun 19 17:40:06 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 7D12521F9E73 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:40:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.516
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.516 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.083, 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 VSlYiCmMFKVd for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:40:04 -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 0FD4A21F9E71 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:40:04 -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 r5K0drvY005052; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:39:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371688798; bh=CtRW1aicZiz1ieQl8NUzLoFJzHOauAsxE8Oc9/RIWek=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=rKaEQn5SbBInO2TYvwxQCUsbMk0ygpFOhNJcjARWUH9/Qg/RcGeBXn59J1JCGnM/H QzpDuC2rWh9gF8CMz5oc3fHeo+Qbn6NsNig4jUdATDrrT2If0fUzokQhmi9DguP4X4 o6C54auVSEgL/YZkoX7JMT/Q6VjWKBDBGZeyDiIE=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371688798; i=@resistor.net; bh=CtRW1aicZiz1ieQl8NUzLoFJzHOauAsxE8Oc9/RIWek=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=lz8E5S/gHJDowgXqSMjBUOCDLrmgJla0NxJZhpaRIIusuUSUeQJMCZrFVwQlhQBgn KQDZoLPiU61LvBY3KPhKoJcRN4fZcTlOMJonjkSyZ1GJLvMLxtjAJjtM3Ub5EA+cCH /acCRFHPasTtqyjywn2dd3i+jSnH6eoIIBrK46Dc=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130619160934.0b2c7598@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:20:19 -0700
To: Aaron Yi DING 
From: SM 
In-Reply-To: <51C2376E.80400@cs.helsinki.fi>
References: <51C09437.5040006@stpeter.im>   <51C14C06.1060207@cs.helsinki.fi>  <2t0xiMKNOIudTjLczEne-KxRYX9oK6AXs7ljHaaAhiRgAJ7bs@smtp.gmail.com> <51C1C0E1.8000900@dcrocker.net> <51C1C980.6000606@stpeter.im> <51C1CD95.4060106@innovationslab.net>  <51C2376E.80400@cs.helsinki.fi>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] IETF Diversity vs. White Male ??
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, 20 Jun 2013 00:40:06 -0000

Hi Aaron,
At 15:57 19-06-2013, Aaron Yi DING wrote:
>By following our diversity discussions so far, the term "white male" 
>seems to be cited rather frequently and most of time with some kind 
>of emotions attached to it, e.g. dominant, power, monopoly etc.  To 
>be honest, I do have a mixed feeling when encountering such KEY WORD 
>in a public speech or along the lines of mail. That feeling 
>resembles very much when I heard Chinese being associated with 
>minority, passive, reserved or even, communist ...

The term old boys club has been mentioned previously.  The above term 
appeared in public discussions a few months ago.  The question of who 
is in power has been discussed over the years.  Some people likely 
perceived that their concerns were being ignored or that they were 
not being given honest answers.  It is reached a point where they 
expressed their feelings about the situation.

>The more relevant thing here is that what do we actually want? Would 
>it be that we need more diverse participation from the globe which 
>in the end maximize the output and impact of IETF? Right now our 
>white male engineers are put on the front line to be 'scrutinized' 
>under the 'diversity' microscope, what if a couple years later, the 
>trend shifts to Asians? or Latin America or Australians or Africans. 
>Sorry, I really try to avoid the skin color or gender here, because 
>I personally believe it is essentially off the topic of the whole 
>IETF diversity thing we shall focus on.

I doubt that the trend will shift over the next few years.  The 
problems are larger when there are two groups of people, those who 
are straight-forward and those who are politically correct.  The 
politically correct group can easily make the group of people who are 
straight-forward look bad.

What people actually want is to be WG Chair, Area Director or RFC 
Author.  It has been said in other communities that IETF positions 
are based on merit.  The changes being asked is not to choose people 
solely on merit.  Please note that I am not saying that the positions 
are actually filled based on merit as I don't choose the persons who 
will fill the positions.

Regards,
-sm 


From sm@resistor.net  Wed Jun 19 17:41:18 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 0F98C21F9C75 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:41:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.518
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.518 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.081, 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 MwKONjc96mta for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:41:17 -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 644A421F9A65 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:41:17 -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 r5K0f9Hl017525; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:41:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371688873; bh=cMk+C1hM8uD1noVswm0lCcF38FaG2/EHg9BH9b8sqPg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=z7jsCxfuy2pkrFULpm5DRM+3IUoY5Xb6Pw+1dz9dDFaUeSgJbh6uXhwEhOgIz0HlU IOYpKy/lgrasg7fJ/u07TUfkkIcdlPDNBYTRrqB11b80vDrPyS/yjrfizAORBZTdvH 6izd18qmMXetS4kZiDXX+g9ud02pKIJiKIVOk0Lw=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371688873; i=@resistor.net; bh=cMk+C1hM8uD1noVswm0lCcF38FaG2/EHg9BH9b8sqPg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=R2kvT+mmgR4+8nekoX0uUHlUk72oLu3Xwf3921Ehva4SwbzBg5/SpAC2GQw74dnyV +dMZA3Nlf+gBUwp3Lj9noNqwcf1LizaiF2+xIVX0H7OgSii+2/rIRQzPxlDoLXncnQ lP/EvL4ANiKU7n/fJ4rz0lgB4NVlBfbRgpzoEy9A=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130619172126.0b17c758@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:40:32 -0700
To: Abdussalam Baryun 
From: SM 
In-Reply-To: 
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618111923.0c9b9340@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130619110829.0cab9c80@resistor.net> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Who are the diversity design team (was: Making allowances for someone)
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, 20 Jun 2013 00:41:18 -0000

At 17:02 19-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>I suggest someone SHOULD report each month what is the summaries of
>discussions on the list.

I'll forward the suggestion.

>Ok the message is good start, but why does not the team discuss
>issues. What is the team doing, or why they are teaming if no plan? Ok
>if no design, why it was named design team? ok if no milestone, do you
>think this team will get successful results? I think my suggestion is
>to make a plan and milestone otherwise the community will feel there
>is no seriuos team.

I suggested not using the name "design team" as it might sound 
confusing.  The team is the group of people who volunteered.

It is too early to know whether there will be successful results.

>IMHO, people already suggested, but did IETF listen or did the team
>summaries them. I think you may not expect much because the team are
>not doing much or they are not discussing much. Why some people did
>not choose me in the team or a team of people discussing the issue?
>Then I think you will expect more,

I don't know why you were not chosen.

The email address to send suggestions is diversity-dt@ietf.org.  You 
can also provide anonymous feedback.  There is also the 
diversity@ietf.org mailing list which is open to anyone.

Regards,
-sm 


From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Thu Jun 20 02:19:46 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 2915E21E80F8 for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 02:19:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.553
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.553 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.047,  BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 WMVWlYWa6uzG for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 02:19:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-x229.google.com (mail-pb0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68C3B21E80FD for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 02:19:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f41.google.com with SMTP id rp16so6045562pbb.0 for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 02:19:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=NASqbhZUBI45zS+wdXr9vb/dOwwxM7sO7+4bSU3tWyA=; b=sT+BB1zK2L3aOFZCaApUuGSondwHv5Y8FlyeaI55LDWldYSXJKbN3++avjAI1K8xRV JI2vvtH1ad4EpEWGNxo1rwKLP4/oTRi4Fig/oM8frkqFIgQtAwaOYaOecrfpibdjzvtX DN/2ZpFP0mLxRlAmoG5SRIbEiaP703Mjbtk7Ipu2uHC46pYlPVG1TWmIkwlcYXkKK97v Coeu0VUKRmxXWVBfPmfjHdLOAnAXXHmKKWH2u8RJpoTKzR7jSUIN3fEx5r5BF2kseQRF wRU/Z98eqG2uHeirUISWU4XBGxxZMzTJ8LQCOhtky4vsjpCZ5UGdpBT0zHHFQj0a0dlP /isA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.66.145.98 with SMTP id st2mr10740836pab.24.1371719985150; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 02:19:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 02:19:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130619172126.0b17c758@resistor.net>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618111923.0c9b9340@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130619110829.0cab9c80@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130619172126.0b17c758@resistor.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 11:19:45 +0200
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: SM 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Who are the diversity design team (was: Making allowances for someone)
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, 20 Jun 2013 09:19:46 -0000

Hi SM

thanks for your answers,

On 6/20/13, SM  wrote:
> At 17:02 19-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
> I suggested not using the name "design team" as it might sound
> confusing.  The team is the group of people who volunteered.

Ok volunteer to do what? do they lead discussions and survey issues,
or just report to management of community input? If they have no plan
of volunteer, not sure how they function.

>
> It is too early to know whether there will be successful results.

I think it is time to know/evaluate what can/connot the team do?

>
>>IMHO, people already suggested, but did IETF listen or did the team
>>summaries them. I think you may not expect much because the team are
>>not doing much or they are not discussing much. Why some people did
>>not choose me in the team or a team of people discussing the issue?
>>Then I think you will expect more,
>
> I don't know why you were not chosen.
>
> The email address to send suggestions is diversity-dt@ietf.org.  You
> can also provide anonymous feedback.  There is also the
> diversity@ietf.org mailing list which is open to anyone.

I usually like to participate/volunteer when I know where things are
going and the direction of such work flow.

AB

From sm@resistor.net  Thu Jun 20 05:24:32 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 D3BBE21F99EB for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 05:24:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.52
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.079, 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 KA5xBEAwPv1m for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 05:24:32 -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 4535721F924A for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 05:24:32 -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 r5KCONia022889; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 05:24:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371731068; bh=k4JrohgCbdJ0TNItEF7iPge51HVAzjkgMGJikqc2U3M=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=hO48AZUtKsV0A0ZA9mJ7UB55PdYjiBWpbzanemQJi+WDa2mTPXw08CSONNQumSi91 tKXTyWLuWn3ErzQ/U05VJXgRMfZNGfLCXwaFMDJIjQ2IjBuuh2WPoxEucoqADZ1pjW Y+JY1h9hV32YNZrwHyBhuMEmiHM2FTgVFSMRNG/g=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371731068; i=@resistor.net; bh=k4JrohgCbdJ0TNItEF7iPge51HVAzjkgMGJikqc2U3M=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=xc5h6SvosketLcASiGimupSHyMUfhpT//qwelJUuWxzkEN8OHz+fi1MEaLVrRmpoj +q7pVZlY7a1LLYr3+mhHAiw638vuMpMCuNx768xFus77lIQsUEC8wUTkCwzQiqtW0z 38pzwI+pTy2JdG530Ky1LF/W4uPFSii7KHh0PrVw=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130620044224.0cbed088@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 05:22:49 -0700
To: Abdussalam Baryun 
From: SM 
In-Reply-To: 
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618111923.0c9b9340@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130619110829.0cab9c80@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130619172126.0b17c758@resistor.net> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Who are the diversity design team (was: Making allowances for someone)
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, 20 Jun 2013 12:24:32 -0000

Hi Abdussalam,
At 02:19 20-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>Ok volunteer to do what? do they lead discussions and survey issues,
>or just report to management of community input? If they have no plan
>of volunteer, not sure how they function.

Reports about IETF activities are usually sent to the IETF community 
for feedback.

I volunteered to help out as there might be some presumption that I 
might be able to understand some of the issues mentioned during 
discussions about diversity.  If I did not volunteer people might 
conclude that I only make fancy speeches at the microphone or spam 
ietf@.  If the diversity team had a plan I would not have volunteered 
to help out as the people already know what they do not want to do.

Regards,
-sm 


From dougb@dougbarton.us  Wed Jun 19 12:22:22 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 BCC6121F995C for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 12:22:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.54
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.54 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.060,  BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 QJF65rtRogfX for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 12:22:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dougbarton.us (dougbarton.us [IPv6:2607:f2f8:ab14::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8180221E80BE for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 12:22:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:470:d:5e7:224:e8ff:fe30:109b] (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:d:5e7:224:e8ff:fe30:109b]) by dougbarton.us (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 651AA22B28; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 19:22:15 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=dougbarton.us; s=dougbarton.us; t=1371669735; bh=cxtzadhUVWwhnME0NDVKN3ZsjeEZNTX8yUYFn3XgPj4=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=DhLL64s6aNYit0Zk/cJntaixgEj96cKy5kMYu32YlvJcnnY9oJ6tU5k8CcoE6hMsN kYTIp/i+L2wQ+j2hRhTdPdVnI/kzC7pE9MoIkafp3PNylg7KqjtNKs9Y4XAuhs0Y9z z380QMNSIhelbdQHpIm4SKDRqBooaim5GEb01ZJU=
Message-ID: <51C204E6.207@dougbarton.us>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 12:22:14 -0700
From: Doug Barton 
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: SM 
References: <51C09437.5040006@stpeter.im>   <51C14C06.1060207@cs.helsinki.fi>  <2t0xiMKNOIudTjLczEne-KxRYX9oK6AXs7ljHaaAhiRgAJ7bs@smtp.gmail.com> <51C1CB4D.4030006@stpeter.im> <51C1CCCB.3060601@gmail.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751E0DC6@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <51C1F277.8050902@dougbarton.us> <51C1F45E.2030805@gmail.com> <51C1F592.1060708@dougbarton.us> <6.2.5.6.2.20130619112906.0cab9240@resistor.net>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130619112906.0cab9240@resistor.net>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 13:09:26 -0700
Cc: diversity@ietf.org, Melinda Shore 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] IETF Diversity
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: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 19:22:22 -0000

On 06/19/2013 11:42 AM, SM wrote:
> Hi Doug,
> At 11:16 19-06-2013, Doug Barton wrote:
>> It's not clear to me how this example relates to the IETF.
>
> The majority of people on the IETF Secretariat are women.  The majority
> of Area Directors are men.

And what does that have to do with anything? That's a serious question, 
BTW, the 2 things you described bear little if any relationship.

The more interesting questions are whether or not the current makeup of 
the IETF leadership is reflective of the population (nee "membership") 
of the IETF as a whole; and whether or not the IETF population reflects 
the larger population of the tech community it draws from. Those are 
problems that outreach, mentorship, etc. can make concrete impacts on.

... and all that is completely aside from the fact that I've yet to see 
a clear explanation of what "the diversity problem" is. Someone else 
pointed out very early in the process that the IETF way of doing things 
is to jump immediately into the solution space. I don't see that this 
issue is being handled any differently than that.

Oh and BTW, the majority of the RSE staff are women, but for the 
majority of the existence of that organization it was headed by a woman. 
How does that affect your analysis?

>> ... and while we're on that topic, what are you doing to help?
>
> I peer with a few people.  I don't think I am doing it correctly as I
> have not been spending as much time as I should on that.  Please note
> that I do not consider the messages I post about diversity discussions
> as helping as it is not a concrete action to me.

Excellent point. :)

Doug


From fred@cisco.com  Wed Jun 19 17:14:28 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 194AB21F9F14; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:14:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.599
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, 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 vPi6LdH2sgT2; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.86.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E232721F9F11; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:14:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1785; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1371687263; x=1372896863; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=8Doh482jpI+92HSrpPi8aNOtniLkZ+VtABaXG5y4DU8=; b=DVAagMznvVXzKA1vfOqNxw7jPaXpSCB0RFwWBhIlibNGnwC+8Sp0/svR 9Taecgbb0USbIzMZfzAInw0ht6qot3v/9WclQu+28qgkqUI5M3YDXh8o2 ZyUiPwpWRsWDZ4o3QpfZfyMnCOvKodPpq2jg0AjZpsjzqDqJV7Etk3Eke Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnMFAG1IwlGtJV2d/2dsb2JhbABagwkxSb8bgQAWdIIjAQEBAwF5BQsCAQgiJDIlAgQOBQgNBYduBgy7c41/gRACMQeDAGEDiGigHYMPgig
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,900,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="224838728"
Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 Jun 2013 00:14:22 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x03.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x03.cisco.com [173.37.183.77]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r5K0EMYi020330 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 20 Jun 2013 00:14:22 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([169.254.9.220]) by xhc-rcd-x03.cisco.com ([173.37.183.77]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 19:14:21 -0500
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" 
To: Aaron Yi DING 
Thread-Topic: IETF Diversity vs. White Male ??
Thread-Index: AQHObUCKaWBM5IGjeUWnCm2sXIq1X5k+D4YA
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 00:14:21 +0000
Message-ID: <8C48B86A895913448548E6D15DA7553B91F405@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com>
References: <51C09437.5040006@stpeter.im>   <51C14C06.1060207@cs.helsinki.fi>  <2t0xiMKNOIudTjLczEne-KxRYX9oK6AXs7ljHaaAhiRgAJ7bs@smtp.gmail.com> <51C1C0E1.8000900@dcrocker.net> <51C1C980.6000606@stpeter.im> <51C1CD95.4060106@innovationslab.net>  <51C2376E.80400@cs.helsinki.fi>
In-Reply-To: <51C2376E.80400@cs.helsinki.fi>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [10.19.64.125]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-ID: 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 13:09:26 -0700
Cc: "" , "" 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] IETF Diversity vs. White Male ??
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, 20 Jun 2013 00:14:28 -0000

On Jun 19, 2013, at 3:57 PM, Aaron Yi DING  wrote:

> Well, if the dominant ones later being replaced by other groups, do we ne=
ed to revamp again? What will be the end?

I'm told that white babies are now a minority of the population in the US. =
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2341066/Whites-soon-minority-Americ=
an-children-age-5.html

It's all about political correctness. It is not politically correct to comm=
ent on women unless you are one and hate men. It is not politically correct=
 to comment on whatever-they're-called-this-week, black, negro, afro-americ=
ans, or whatever. It is not politically correct to comment on hispanics, or=
 to note that they are not a race; they might be a culture, but for the mos=
t part they are people who grew up outside spain but speak - or whose paren=
ts speak - some derivative of spanish as a native language. Or Asians, for =
that matter. But it is absolutely politically correct to make racist and se=
xist remarks - the same remarks that would draw outrage and umbrage if made=
 about any of a list of other groups - about people who happen to be caucas=
ian and male.

A conversation from the 1993 movie Gettysburg comes to mind.=20

Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain: Tell me something, Buster... What do y=
ou think of Negroes?=20
Sergeant 'Buster' Kilrain: Well, if you mean the race, I don't really know.=
 This is not a thing to be ashamed of. The thing is, you cannot judge a rac=
e. Any man who judges by the group is a pea-wit. You take men one at a time=
.

I would replace "man" or "men" with "person" or "people" in the observation=
, and would agree with it. There are a lot of pea-wits in the world. Some o=
f them are white males. Many are not.=

From hsantos@isdg.net  Fri Jun 21 11:19:53 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 7C4B711E8104 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 11:19:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.122
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.122 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.523, 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 xvdwZO8Kme-9 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 11:19:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.catinthebox.net (ftp.catinthebox.net [208.247.131.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A71AE11E81A3 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 11:19:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=isdg.net; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/relaxed; l=2723; t=1371838779; h=Received:Received: Message-ID:Date:From:To:Subject:Organization:List-ID; bh=5OJ3Tdf 894P2v3Ksfal4C8B8cv4=; b=WZLFBIIg+ZSMMRcIcfskWxXpiyr+B9yVY06P7Yy G7Sxmd/mfn6FXX5dXLIRDbY2GmfMwdgQu8uAngwgBRg1P+ezo5KA7EhzMNWNnQBa qA5YCnrARkcMTLnc8AT7NqpnxGTISXZ9UbkZzclAU1xLVepL7u1/oRylZaHyAnGR u4cM=
Received: by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v7.0.454.4) for diversity@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 14:19:39 -0400
Received: from [208.247.131.8] ([208.247.131.8]) by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v7.0.454.4) with ESMTP id 2596323282.6477.3016; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 14:19:39 -0400
Message-ID: <51C498A1.504@isdg.net>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 14:17:05 -0400
From: Hector Santos 
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.2; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: SM 
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618111923.0c9b9340@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130619110829.0cab9c80@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130619172126.0b17c758@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130620044224.0cbed088@resistor.net>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130620044224.0cbed088@resistor.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: diversity@ietf.org, Abdussalam Baryun 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Who are the diversity design team
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, 21 Jun 2013 18:19:53 -0000

Hi SM,  That may come out the wrong way. Do I need to volunteer to not 
be considered a IETF spammer (bullshit artist with comments and input, 
but does not volunteer to do the IETF work)?

I don't think so for the many obvious reasons and I think most folks are 
in the same common position - provide input only. As being a possible 
candidate, I was part of the 1960-80s USA Affirmative Action programs 
and was even part of Mobil Oil R&D, Westinghouse (Major corporations) 
minority outreach programs to recruit and show as an successful example 
what an engineering life can brings to them. I myself a Chemical 
Engineer, after wide corporate training, I left and became successful in 
the blossoming telecommunications business, very much experienced in 
project and product management, software production, marketing and legal 
aspects and I believe I could contribute some insights into the issue to 
help improve the IETF.  But I do have a motive - I don't wish to be a 
watchdog any more with many of the changing protocols. We need better 
diverse engineering and oversights. We need to be careful of the "paper 
pushers" taking control of the engineering process. We are dangerously 
touching based with diverse conflict of interest issues.

Anyway, as much as I may want to help, I don't really wish to volunteer 
because I can not commit the time to it. If I was asked, I would 
consider it but only really in some small contribution standpoint, when 
possible like, well, now.

I suppose the "Design Team" is going to collect all the thoughts, bits 
and bytes and produce possible a Diversity Problem Statement and 
Recommendations in how the IETF can be improved by addressing certain 
key problem areas.

--
HLS

On 6/20/2013 8:22 AM, SM wrote:
> Hi Abdussalam,
> At 02:19 20-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>> Ok volunteer to do what? do they lead discussions and survey issues,
>> or just report to management of community input? If they have no plan
>> of volunteer, not sure how they function.
>
> Reports about IETF activities are usually sent to the IETF community for
> feedback.
>
> I volunteered to help out as there might be some presumption that I
> might be able to understand some of the issues mentioned during
> discussions about diversity.  If I did not volunteer people might
> conclude that I only make fancy speeches at the microphone or spam
> ietf@.  If the diversity team had a plan I would not have volunteered to
> help out as the people already know what they do not want to do.
>
> Regards,
> -sm
> _______________________________________________
> diversity mailing list
> diversity@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>
>


From sm@resistor.net  Fri Jun 21 19:12:41 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 2801821F9D10 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 19:12:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.531
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.531 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.068, 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 xBksX9gQsVMP for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 19:12:40 -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 2C1DE21F9048 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 19:12:40 -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 r5M2CWKT029862; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 19:12:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371867158; bh=w1etblTHEMbmSQKWDMNOrHi451ZpLy+OIRCy+WYbT1g=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=u8N2LO3vZ32NFW7zq6Od8Xs6UW5XIhXhwRTg65R9dk8H9dG7HK7QI5ZYidgQK5dcA SKIHCmhkHKiiXXcF2O1frc24Bzhw/cfwWTMfLx5zyNf5v45z5zI1iKFsBb0Ra8QXYC 4S4plOZ28EFydsfE5y67AfdMUclDe6GS9un8EtJc=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371867158; i=@resistor.net; bh=w1etblTHEMbmSQKWDMNOrHi451ZpLy+OIRCy+WYbT1g=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=Ndw+VlQ9rHuAesF+QdUWA5raFxnrve4n7ER2dQqjflvingFAz+5gWQoq/YH9q/gCd gKNBt3wkDw1l6+KkUpYkHJ8tsNjVVwwkMNZQJ7kfftHJ0MjBwc2XS/K+JJHZWYfYvw 1Q/CqbCpQucrH0T+qwZfmxvQa5FyTmVsR9+PCZ8Q=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130621171318.0e3e0ef8@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 18:01:30 -0700
To: Hector Santos 
From: SM 
In-Reply-To: <51C498A1.504@isdg.net>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618111923.0c9b9340@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130619110829.0cab9c80@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130619172126.0b17c758@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130620044224.0cbed088@resistor.net> <51C498A1.504@isdg.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Who are the diversity design team
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: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 02:12:41 -0000

Hi Hector,
At 11:17 21-06-2013, Hector Santos wrote:
>Hi SM,  That may come out the wrong way. Do I need to volunteer to 
>not be considered a IETF spammer (bullshit artist with comments and 
>input, but does not volunteer to do the IETF work)?

What I meant was that I spam ietf@.  I did not imply that anyone else 
does that.

Stephen Farrell commented about contributions at 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/diversity/current/msg00080.html 
The short answer is that you do not need to volunteer.  Please note 
that this is my personal opinion only.

>Anyway, as much as I may want to help, I don't really wish to 
>volunteer because I can not commit the time to it. If I was asked, I 
>would consider it but only really in some small contribution 
>standpoint, when possible like, well, now.

I am okay when a person tells me that he or she cannot commit the 
time.  I personally do not have any problem with what is written above.

Regards,
-sm 


From sm@resistor.net  Fri Jun 21 19:17:02 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 AF83421F9D50 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 19:17:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.532
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.067, 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 ZJ7DvZVOcvZz for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 19:17:01 -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 B921121F9D4E for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 19:17:01 -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 r5M2GsvF006718; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 19:16:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371867421; bh=6cO/3P+JKwO6sA/flfV2npVsTT/7HqgRJRNiuX01Fks=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=yAR2jFKx5RcPDeSTS7OI/dmJSD8SY98y4iCKh1wZDBd5gG66HjqDNQN1JpsdXWMp6 FE1ujeThNQUjk8hmGfTNY8SDf+JL0byxFut2hGD0jC9rc4mWo6pT1H9Qjzsi8dTfk+ 2E6AD3sRCzfVyC84uOZ4iZZ5/8/TAB10C1PBfpwI=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371867421; i=@resistor.net; bh=6cO/3P+JKwO6sA/flfV2npVsTT/7HqgRJRNiuX01Fks=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=JhQbSxTaBkw/eZZWOdXJHwXEbsUoASKcqqCIjFf0QHls+ps50wc0Rj3yLXEp745ef mErPGJuAYeuJn1Ru9DaSlJ2IyeL66InAzRCSEmd+tpJMM6cIGYQk2VnW1e5bezFF7m QlX1coDh0ypWUgqpZBkQr72EbkDdTBHqF6Xjxics=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130621180611.0e3f4650@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 19:15:49 -0700
To: Thomas Narten , Carsten Bormann , Jari Arkko 
From: SM 
In-Reply-To: <201304172045.r3HKj7VH024598@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
References: <88A363AF-712C-4BA1-A445-3DDB9D8E289F@piuha.net> <201304172045.r3HKj7VH024598@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: [Diversity] Selecting a person from a pool of candidates that are above the bar (was: Defining the Diversity problems)
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: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 02:17:02 -0000

At 13:45 17-04-2013, Thomas Narten wrote:
>One concrete change we could make that might make a difference is to
>change the mantra of "selecting the best person for the job" to
>"selecting a person from a pool of candidates that are above the bar".
>
>This is an important distinction. If we always select the "best"
>person, that favors those that have been in the community for a long
>time. Experience begets more experience. That is the essence of the
>good ol' boys network.
>
>What we really want, is to select people that will do an adequate
>job. To me, that doesn't always mean "best". What it really means is
>that they don't have any glaring disqualifications.
>
>I.e., you can't expect folk to be "ideal" in all categories. But they
>MUST not be below a threshold in key categories. Like judgement, BS
>detection, ability to work with people, etc.

First of all, thanks for suggesting a concrete change.

Recently someone congratulated a person on his appointment for a 
position.  It wasn't a surprise for a lot of people.  The essence 
(see above) has been mentioned previously in 
draft-klensin-nomcom-incumbents-first.

The above might even be the essence of the problem.  I would describe 
the problem as not being about diversity; it is more about having the 
expertise and experience that the IETF requires to be functional.  I 
was thinking about how much time it takes to build someone for a 
position; I am not thinking about mentoring here.  My guess is that 
it would take years.

Information about the key categories mentioned above could be gleaned 
through publicly accessible material.  Currently, such information is 
not always available.

At 13:55 17-04-2013, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>*) We just had this fierce debate about introducing a quota system 
>for supervisory boards in Germany.  I just don't want to go there.

I don't think that was what Thomas Narten was suggesting.

At 14:07 17-04-2013, Jari Arkko wrote:
>of the criteria that often got emphasised was "training new 
>leadership". You do not always pick the person with most experience. 
>You try to optimise the availability of talent on longer term. An 
>(experienced person, new person with potential) pair was often

Yes.

In my opinion the above and what Thomas Narten was suggesting can be 
viewed as two different things or it can be another of the key categories.

Regards,
-sm 


From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Fri Jun 21 21:52:28 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 5342721F9CF1 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 21:52:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.558
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.558 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.042,  BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 I4-7EYN0y7JB for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 21:52:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x233.google.com (mail-pa0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC34F21F9D04 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 21:52:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id lf11so8704086pab.38 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 21:52:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=1asF1h3Bj3tFYFv4FeJOsWBH/seK7yWAyZAxBe6k9JA=; b=qpt17CYbf4IV48L9ImEYaKfINY1PxzmPFO9nTzbJjYkwlVvals8ODwWsLv+0F4tvr9 6pM/DgVLeWueP3QOy/KH5I/tjs+V78MLfeq80k5MtVfQCr9H18rwA0DldlPEbRfQj3eQ BCKHbQRAFb+6g+IYI4On4wTNQeUATsQj/9K7V7TIH/bXWtaePWL2hkmEpfkUfzp+oR9/ LVSwPcuIN+ANMNIx4RY7ccN/9CeNrWJdo0NMggkrnfi08TJsP2dp8kPduCy0DIoUcbp+ FKukbIXTJUxvbYoONl3wSkxW/aLtaPe+qBcVwmuW76eJXV2ySN0eTNRk7RWwKH7HCDgd 04ug==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.66.248.228 with SMTP id yp4mr19013793pac.158.1371876746130;  Fri, 21 Jun 2013 21:52:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 21:52:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51C498A1.504@isdg.net>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130616090040.0bcda1e0@elandnews.com> <51BEAD23.40306@gmail.com> <3AB6D4AB-11C8-463F-A2DD-22FD7931128B@emc.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0D0C@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51BF0CC2.4040802@gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302E0DDD@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130617110357.0bcae5c0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618041754.0d77ebe0@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130618111923.0c9b9340@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130619110829.0cab9c80@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130619172126.0b17c758@resistor.net>  <6.2.5.6.2.20130620044224.0cbed088@resistor.net> <51C498A1.504@isdg.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 06:52:26 +0200
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: Hector Santos 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: SM , diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Who are the diversity design team
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: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 04:52:28 -0000

On 6/21/13, Hector Santos  wrote:
> I suppose the "Design Team" is going to collect all the thoughts, bits
> and bytes and produce possible a Diversity Problem Statement and
> Recommendations in how the IETF can be improved by addressing certain
> key problem areas.

I support your idea, I also would request that the team plan should be
produce a possible diversity problem statement and recommendations.

AB

From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Fri Jun 21 22:34:47 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 938F321F9E01 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 22:34:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.559
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.559 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.041,  BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 UANxJyziWXYR for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 22:34:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x22b.google.com (mail-pa0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EADC621F9DED for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 22:34:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id hz11so8762313pad.2 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 22:34:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=P/cUjmlEkmz3o7uHaCILLpd42cp7IhpHBDZyvwOzj0s=; b=ujqF2JSvmerssf/O41v2t6u2Vl2dvIMWXdpCf8l2sZKN+afabqYKXXEn007j9CR3K2 AxJlMGxIEw8nHdJt9MOmB6D8FB92Goxbg20rSI4KvRPsYtCMz8KvTM55M4FKwQhJR9/6 vufYUETMMucqS9Qu7PQ5I4c16tqrA9T1OiT4ox1Oao1cn7qP6p+khKAr6f+znIoTKfhS ezPEk8LkDQtEi+Hff2B3JuUDhy0dicVndogbBvMrag/AZws8sSwxUbFOuMMPHvaZv7iu Imo0R3WiE89tcBrw/i84TrFIldHq7p1Q78U5wHIVFh0MgylM9bzEOuVHy2xRRbx0rIGv lhLQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.68.183.194 with SMTP id eo2mr15168452pbc.43.1371879286520; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 22:34:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Jun 2013 22:34:46 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130621180611.0e3f4650@resistor.net>
References: <88A363AF-712C-4BA1-A445-3DDB9D8E289F@piuha.net> <201304172045.r3HKj7VH024598@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20130621180611.0e3f4650@resistor.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 07:34:46 +0200
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: SM 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Selecting a person from a pool of candidates that are above the bar (was: Defining the Diversity problems)
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: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 05:34:47 -0000

On 6/22/13, SM  wrote:
> At 13:45 17-04-2013, Thomas Narten wrote:
>>One concrete change we could make that might make a difference is to
>>change the mantra of "selecting the best person for the job" to
>>"selecting a person from a pool of candidates that are above the bar".
>>
It depends on how we define the *best*. Also depends if we are the
best in selecting.
Does IETF select the best person for its jobs (not sure which job ment
above!)? Does IETF monitor/report performance of jobs or it leaves it
to the best-community to do the hard job? Is diversity in the equation
of selecting persons into jobs?

>>This is an important distinction. If we always select the "best"
>>person, that favors those that have been in the community for a long
>>time. Experience begets more experience. That is the essence of the
>>good ol' boys network.

I will say IETF selects the best known to be best person from a pool
of candidates, ignoring diversity. Is diversity in the equation?

>>
>>What we really want, is to select people that will do an adequate
>>job. To me, that doesn't always mean "best". What it really means is
>>that they don't have any glaring disqualifications.

I agree, but I will add that we need to change people in jobs, or to
make selected person not fixed to one job.

>>
>>I.e., you can't expect folk to be "ideal" in all categories. But they
>>MUST not be below a threshold in key categories. Like judgement, BS
>>detection, ability to work with people, etc.
>
> First of all, thanks for suggesting a concrete change.
>
> Recently someone congratulated a person on his appointment for a
> position.  It wasn't a surprise for a lot of people.  The essence
> (see above) has been mentioned previously in
> draft-klensin-nomcom-incumbents-first.
>
> The above might even be the essence of the problem.  I would describe
> the problem as not being about diversity; it is more about having the
> expertise and experience that the IETF requires to be functional.

All are important selecting; experties, skills, diversity, and
networking. Are these key factors the only we should consider?

>  I
> was thinking about how much time it takes to build someone for a
> position; I am not thinking about mentoring here.  My guess is that
> it would take years.

The time depends on the person first, and then on the organisation. Do
we have the best system for that building/processing?

>
> Information about the key categories mentioned above could be gleaned
> through publicly accessible material.  Currently, such information is
> not always available.

I agree, if the community has no information then how can it select a
person, or even select a job for it? In IETF we need more diversity in
*jobs* then in *persons* doing thoes diverse jobs.
>
> At 14:07 17-04-2013, Jari Arkko wrote:
>>of the criteria that often got emphasised was "training new
>>leadership". You do not always pick the person with most experience.
>>You try to optimise the availability of talent on longer term. An
>>(experienced person, new person with potential) pair was often
>
> Yes.

training leadership is important, but the best way is doing that while
they are in the leader job, and that that leader-person is able to
self-build new skills from the best-community.

>
> In my opinion the above and what Thomas Narten was suggesting can be
> viewed as two different things or it can be another of the key categories.

Not understood, could you put the difference/keys in points. I don't
see the suggestions clear to be categories. Each job has its special
selecting categories, I don't beleive the jobs in IETF are all the
same, and the diversity key is not necessary in all jobs, I think only
few. I hope we get to know together which jobs need diversity and
which don't. Thanks SM your discussion make me think and try to find
best suggestion, but I may not be the best just trying to be :-)

AB

From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Sun Jun 23 02:59:30 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 17C5C21F9BFB for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 02:59:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.561
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.561 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.039,  BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, 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 76bdvhJXg6CZ for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 02:59:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x22a.google.com (mail-pa0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27E8921F99F2 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 02:59:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f42.google.com with SMTP id rl6so9762450pac.1 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 02:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=nJ7Z84vX5X0ybKlxmGMMrTwKl2C/kXRdv7qa3IVXOFQ=; b=EmD8xyzpgqtf2SMkIQ4XZpFplsHUu+6uSRLKF2Hd0itj37F0w+PKh8t7dexswHgzwJ +hm8On8NtG3P8ArFLORHVIiHAItKHBU1CX1zxxMMtc/pzvpOcuS7jb62f8SuKE487nrw JODmKK28PvXUpCwSHgSk7LJECO159a4U7x+ntimHOicUCNSlj7EYe3q3834g9YnNoTrH Gh/eQZYOxqQHnl9hwAn+ZZrZPHD8Z1qdnB4GIxKwgXBlKy+RdlB670D3zqsBW36Vnke3 1viynSMNaOtkAK8m/85LFk/DbSdw0nIk78WPfTJXstpSryHgRfk4UbWQ5n2Y85dEE75K 3iOw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.66.121.131 with SMTP id lk3mr23061289pab.43.1371981568875; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 02:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 02:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 11:59:28 +0200
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: "diversity@ietf.org" 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity of IETF Leadership
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: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:59:30 -0000

To the Design Team,

I send my reply in March 2013 to the below message recieved to add my
name to the letter, but never got a reply. Do I understand that my
name was added or not. Do I understand that IETF does not recognise me
because I did not come to its meeting (remote participant)? I have a
feeling that IETF administrators have ignored my message, is that
feeling correct? Please investigate for me, because this is under my
investigation and complaint process.

My follow up process on IETF diversity.
AB

On 3/10/13, Abdussalam Baryun  wrote:
To: ietf.diversity@gmail.com
> Please add my name signing the letter below,
>
> Abdussalam Baryun
>
> Regards
> Abdussalam Baryun
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++
> The letter below was sent to the IESG, the IAB, the IAOC and the ISOC
> Board this morning, in an attempt to open a discussion of how to
> increase the diversity of the IETF Leadership.  We are sharing the
> letter here to encourage community discussion of this important topic.
>
>
> If you support this letter and would like to be added as a signatory,
> please send e-mail to ietf.diversity at gmail.com, and your name will
> be added to the list of signatures.
>
>
> ---
>
>
> ** An Open Letter to the IESG, the IAB, the IAOC and the ISOC Board **
>
>
> Dear Members of the IETF Leadership,
>
>
> We would like to call your attention to an issue that weakens the
> IETF's decision-making process and calls into question the
> legitimacy of the IETF as an International Standards Development
> Organization: the lack of diversity of the IETF leadership.
>
>
> In addition to the moral and social issues involved, diversity of
> leadership across several axes (race, geographic location, gender
> and corporate affiliation) is important for three practical reasons:
>
>
>     - It is a well-established fact that diverse groups are smarter
>       and make better decisions than less-diverse groups.
>
>
>     - Lack of diversity in our leadership becomes a self-perpetuating
>       problem, because people who are not represented in the IETF
>       leadership are less likely to dedicate their time and effort to
>       the IETF.
>
>
>     - The lack of diversity in the IETF leadership undermines our
>       credibility and challenges our legitimacy as an International
>       Standards Development Organization.
>
>
> Unfortunately, despite a substantial increase in the number of IETF
> leadership positions (from 25 to 32) and increasingly diverse
> attendance at IETF meetings, the diversity of the IETF leadership has
> not improved.  In fact, it seems to have dropped significantly over
> the past ten years.
>
>
> For example, ten years ago, in February of 2003, there were 25 members
> of the IETF leadership (12 IAB members and 13 IESG members).  Of those
> 25 members, there was one member of non-European descent, there was one
> member from a country outside of North America or Europe, and there were
> four women.  There were 23 companies represented in the IETF leadership
> (out of a total of 25 seats).
>
>
> In February of 2013, there were 32 members of the IETF leadership
> (12 IAB members, 15 IESG members and 5 IAOC members).  Of those 32
> members, there was one member of non-European descent, there were no
> members from countries outside of North America or Europe, and there
> was only one woman.  There were only 19 companies represented (out of
> a total of 32 seats).
>
>
> It is important to the continued relevance and success of the IETF
> that we address this issue and eliminate whatever factors are
> contributing to the lack of diversity in our leadership.  We believe
> that this is an important and urgent issue that requires your
> immediate attention.
>
>
> There are several steps that could be taken, in the short-term within
> our existing BCPs, to address this problem:
>
>
>      - Each of the IETF leadership bodies (the IESG, IAB and IAOC)
>        could update the qualifications that they submit to the
>        Nominations Committee (through the IAD) to make it clear that
>        the Nominations Committee should actively seek to increase the
>        diversity of that body in terms of race, geographic location,
>        gender and corporate affiliation.
>
>
>      - Each of the confirming bodies (the ISOC Board for the IAB, the
>        IAB for the IESG, and the IESG for the IAOC) could make a
>        public statement at the beginning of each year's nominations
>        process that they will not confirm a slate unless it
>        contributes to increased diversity within the IETF leadership,
>        or it is accompanied by a detailed explanation of what
>        steps were taken to select a more diverse slate and why it was
>        not possible to do so.
>
>
>      - The ISOC President could continue to select Nominations
>        Committee Chairs who understand the value of diversity and are
>        committed to increasing the diversity of the IETF.
>
>
>      - The Nominations Committee could be offered resources or
>        training on the value of diversity, techniques to recruit a
>        more diverse candidate pool, and/or information about how to
>        minimize conflict-of-interest and personal bias in their
>        selection process.
>
>
> We also feel that more substantial and longer-term changes may be
> needed to fully address this issue.  Therefore, we request that the
> new IETF Chair assemble a design team (with diverse membership, of
> course) to determine the causes of this problem and to make
> suggestions for longer-term solutions to be considered by the IETF.
>
>
> We are committed to working within the IETF to make the changes
> that are needed to correct this serious issue.
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
> (In alphabetical order)
>
>
> Bernard Aboba
> Cathy Aronson
> Alia Atlas
> Mary Barnes
> Mohamed Boucadair
> Brian Carpenter
> Stuart Cheshire
> Alissa Cooper
> Spencer Dawkins
> Roni Even
> Janet Gunn
> Stephen Hanna
> Ted Hardie
> Sam Hartman
> Fangwei Hu
> Geoff Huston
> Christian Jacquenet
> Mirjam Kuehne
> Olaf Kolkman
> Suresh Krishnan
> Barry Leiba
> Ted Lemon
> Kepeng Li
> Dapeng Liu
> Allison Mankin
> Bill Manning
> Kathleen Moriarty
> Monique Morrow
> Nurani Nimpuno
> Matt Nottingham
> Erik Nordmark
> Karen O'Donoghue
> Iuniana Oprescu
> Jaqueline Queiroz
> Hosnieh Rafiee
> Pete Resnick
> Lea Roberts
> Simon Pietro Romano
> Peter Saint-Andre
> Eve Schooler
> Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
> Larissa Shapiro
> Melinda Shore
> Barbara Stark
> Brian Trammel
> Tina Tsou
> Justin Uberti
> Margaret Wasserman
> Renee Wilson-Burstein
> James Woodyatt
> Lucy Yong
> Jessica Yu
> Lixia Zhang
>

From sm@resistor.net  Sun Jun 23 03:28:12 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 2516921F9BA3 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 03:28:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.535
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.535 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.064, 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 pWYU5uUJT3+i for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 03:28:11 -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 84B6621F9B98 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 03:28:11 -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 r5NAS1VO028941; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 03:28:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1371983285; bh=58/ckrU75Ezm31urdFL3qhnSXVcn2ddgl7gzl8V6oS4=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc; b=PcjRIz4j3T2CfEGmDHJ9fFYJ6wZ9jiH87nlHNB8dq5mhdZynJeaFWhHqZUI9Sp8Zh Nv9sj9rK68fmwkDyW4SOLXTzzp8vUJAKGe9SRPdPaD40+kZQvQjwZud1s0HyQdc1PQ +VQzddFFLX8R89v4+e6wmumMcS2lKUjZ0SiwhpqA=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1371983285; i=@resistor.net; bh=58/ckrU75Ezm31urdFL3qhnSXVcn2ddgl7gzl8V6oS4=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc; b=sk9tpcXbQ60k62Igu6ikQkSkUN9EffTX+hDQ+xkZN8fcV8wrsukNeXAmF9lfO/dap R6BhrmE3KY6wSmFaGBeT265qThTlOWH4/dOgBeTJYRHyxEfoyomGhgCoUYewiGWUGU TBwld8zrShXaqG6+p9oVF7XQ/dRkPII/lFos/WjA=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130623032626.0b974600@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 03:27:09 -0700
To: Abdussalam Baryun 
From: SM 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Selecting a person from a pool of candidates that are above the bar (was: Defining the Diversity problems)
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: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 10:28:12 -0000

Hi Abdussalam,
At 22:34 21-06-2013, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>Not understood, could you put the difference/keys in points. I don't
>see the suggestions clear to be categories. Each job has its special
>selecting categories, I don't beleive the jobs in IETF are all the

I used the words from the fourth paragraph of another message 
(msg-id: 201304172045.r3HKj7VH024598@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com ) as it 
was easier to try and understand the ideas instead of discussing 
about terminology.

Regards,
-sm  


From arturo.servin@gmail.com  Sun Jun 23 22:56:04 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 6355D21F9DB9 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 22:56:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.599
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 e6eHwm0Su+Uw for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 22:56:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-x230.google.com (mail-we0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5244421F9BDC for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 22:56:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f176.google.com with SMTP id t56so7694348wes.7 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 22:56:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5fwh5IaKaPdKhb5gcJp6g17AGrvKPGtgw+q9MNDoBIg=; b=FgTmhTIRFGz6hj+s0maudxLzsPylX1ReEVkJpM9bZOwHUsuCwbQ6DzB38Z6ypKzeOS gpMk0kTUc2T4iHDkG0jUw0UWU0PfO0At/ypjkwWQ93iVeYdqZJow+elNaQVV8vN1u34T XTUBZcYctQeZNvpzfVyczStlJW6wDFjl7gtaYTXwQszMfaWyF18gMTXrl9hph0pgwZfg 3JiQjzm8UER9osXfU+vO3xHDUyckkEHW+Uzuk0E5uvHDJRGIN4cNaKmgEFdiQDN9VJH1 emBg49R/K3+AYliujGoTLLouZw1a+nmHYedPvJi/yaJKFDVZFzp9a+W+tvXFrkeoUhAX vBaw==
X-Received: by 10.194.243.164 with SMTP id wz4mr14575958wjc.28.1372053361369;  Sun, 23 Jun 2013 22:56:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.10] ([90.214.123.34]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id nj19sm14050625wic.1.2013.06.23.22.56.00 for  (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 23 Jun 2013 22:56:00 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51C7DF70.6080602@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:56:00 +0100
From: Arturo Servin 
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Abdussalam Baryun 
References:  
In-Reply-To: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity of IETF Leadership
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: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 05:56:04 -0000

Abdussalam

	This letter was not send by the DT, it was sent by a group of
individuals interested in promoting diversity in the IETF. If I recall
correctly it was sent a few days before the IAOC plenary in Orlando.

	I would suggest to redirect your questions related to that letter to
them at the email provided:

ietf.diversity at gmail.com,

	Regarding your other question:

"Do I understand that IETF does not recognise me because I did not come
to its meeting (remote participant)?"

	I think that the IETF recognize all of us as participants even though
we do not go to the face to face meetings.

Regards,
as

On 6/23/13 10:59 AM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
> To the Design Team,
> 
> I send my reply in March 2013 to the below message recieved to add my
> name to the letter, but never got a reply. Do I understand that my
> name was added or not. Do I understand that IETF does not recognise me
> because I did not come to its meeting (remote participant)? I have a
> feeling that IETF administrators have ignored my message, is that
> feeling correct? Please investigate for me, because this is under my
> investigation and complaint process.
> 
> My follow up process on IETF diversity.
> AB
> 
> On 3/10/13, Abdussalam Baryun  wrote:
> To: ietf.diversity@gmail.com
>> Please add my name signing the letter below,
>>
>> Abdussalam Baryun
>>
>> Regards
>> Abdussalam Baryun
>>
>> ++++++++++++++++++++
>> The letter below was sent to the IESG, the IAB, the IAOC and the ISOC
>> Board this morning, in an attempt to open a discussion of how to
>> increase the diversity of the IETF Leadership.  We are sharing the
>> letter here to encourage community discussion of this important topic.
>>
>>
>> If you support this letter and would like to be added as a signatory,
>> please send e-mail to ietf.diversity at gmail.com, and your name will
>> be added to the list of signatures.
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>>
>> ** An Open Letter to the IESG, the IAB, the IAOC and the ISOC Board **
>>
>>
>> Dear Members of the IETF Leadership,
>>
>>
>> We would like to call your attention to an issue that weakens the
>> IETF's decision-making process and calls into question the
>> legitimacy of the IETF as an International Standards Development
>> Organization: the lack of diversity of the IETF leadership.
>>
>>
>> In addition to the moral and social issues involved, diversity of
>> leadership across several axes (race, geographic location, gender
>> and corporate affiliation) is important for three practical reasons:
>>
>>
>>     - It is a well-established fact that diverse groups are smarter
>>       and make better decisions than less-diverse groups.
>>
>>
>>     - Lack of diversity in our leadership becomes a self-perpetuating
>>       problem, because people who are not represented in the IETF
>>       leadership are less likely to dedicate their time and effort to
>>       the IETF.
>>
>>
>>     - The lack of diversity in the IETF leadership undermines our
>>       credibility and challenges our legitimacy as an International
>>       Standards Development Organization.
>>
>>
>> Unfortunately, despite a substantial increase in the number of IETF
>> leadership positions (from 25 to 32) and increasingly diverse
>> attendance at IETF meetings, the diversity of the IETF leadership has
>> not improved.  In fact, it seems to have dropped significantly over
>> the past ten years.
>>
>>
>> For example, ten years ago, in February of 2003, there were 25 members
>> of the IETF leadership (12 IAB members and 13 IESG members).  Of those
>> 25 members, there was one member of non-European descent, there was one
>> member from a country outside of North America or Europe, and there were
>> four women.  There were 23 companies represented in the IETF leadership
>> (out of a total of 25 seats).
>>
>>
>> In February of 2013, there were 32 members of the IETF leadership
>> (12 IAB members, 15 IESG members and 5 IAOC members).  Of those 32
>> members, there was one member of non-European descent, there were no
>> members from countries outside of North America or Europe, and there
>> was only one woman.  There were only 19 companies represented (out of
>> a total of 32 seats).
>>
>>
>> It is important to the continued relevance and success of the IETF
>> that we address this issue and eliminate whatever factors are
>> contributing to the lack of diversity in our leadership.  We believe
>> that this is an important and urgent issue that requires your
>> immediate attention.
>>
>>
>> There are several steps that could be taken, in the short-term within
>> our existing BCPs, to address this problem:
>>
>>
>>      - Each of the IETF leadership bodies (the IESG, IAB and IAOC)
>>        could update the qualifications that they submit to the
>>        Nominations Committee (through the IAD) to make it clear that
>>        the Nominations Committee should actively seek to increase the
>>        diversity of that body in terms of race, geographic location,
>>        gender and corporate affiliation.
>>
>>
>>      - Each of the confirming bodies (the ISOC Board for the IAB, the
>>        IAB for the IESG, and the IESG for the IAOC) could make a
>>        public statement at the beginning of each year's nominations
>>        process that they will not confirm a slate unless it
>>        contributes to increased diversity within the IETF leadership,
>>        or it is accompanied by a detailed explanation of what
>>        steps were taken to select a more diverse slate and why it was
>>        not possible to do so.
>>
>>
>>      - The ISOC President could continue to select Nominations
>>        Committee Chairs who understand the value of diversity and are
>>        committed to increasing the diversity of the IETF.
>>
>>
>>      - The Nominations Committee could be offered resources or
>>        training on the value of diversity, techniques to recruit a
>>        more diverse candidate pool, and/or information about how to
>>        minimize conflict-of-interest and personal bias in their
>>        selection process.
>>
>>
>> We also feel that more substantial and longer-term changes may be
>> needed to fully address this issue.  Therefore, we request that the
>> new IETF Chair assemble a design team (with diverse membership, of
>> course) to determine the causes of this problem and to make
>> suggestions for longer-term solutions to be considered by the IETF.
>>
>>
>> We are committed to working within the IETF to make the changes
>> that are needed to correct this serious issue.
>>
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>>
>> (In alphabetical order)
>>
>>
>> Bernard Aboba
>> Cathy Aronson
>> Alia Atlas
>> Mary Barnes
>> Mohamed Boucadair
>> Brian Carpenter
>> Stuart Cheshire
>> Alissa Cooper
>> Spencer Dawkins
>> Roni Even
>> Janet Gunn
>> Stephen Hanna
>> Ted Hardie
>> Sam Hartman
>> Fangwei Hu
>> Geoff Huston
>> Christian Jacquenet
>> Mirjam Kuehne
>> Olaf Kolkman
>> Suresh Krishnan
>> Barry Leiba
>> Ted Lemon
>> Kepeng Li
>> Dapeng Liu
>> Allison Mankin
>> Bill Manning
>> Kathleen Moriarty
>> Monique Morrow
>> Nurani Nimpuno
>> Matt Nottingham
>> Erik Nordmark
>> Karen O'Donoghue
>> Iuniana Oprescu
>> Jaqueline Queiroz
>> Hosnieh Rafiee
>> Pete Resnick
>> Lea Roberts
>> Simon Pietro Romano
>> Peter Saint-Andre
>> Eve Schooler
>> Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
>> Larissa Shapiro
>> Melinda Shore
>> Barbara Stark
>> Brian Trammel
>> Tina Tsou
>> Justin Uberti
>> Margaret Wasserman
>> Renee Wilson-Burstein
>> James Woodyatt
>> Lucy Yong
>> Jessica Yu
>> Lixia Zhang
>>
> _______________________________________________
> diversity mailing list
> diversity@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
> 

From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Mon Jun 24 06:30:07 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 AB53321E80DC for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:30:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.587
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.587 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.012,  BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, 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 ubQp1gCV70tJ for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:30:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-x22b.google.com (mail-pb0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1285721E80E9 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:30:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f43.google.com with SMTP id md12so11077126pbc.16 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:30:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=RNCbd9kFPg/8q0ve8xJaTFd1v7xNu/1nBdpbYQQIB+A=; b=jr2rNrXqyRlnvmhG6+SxZ8sJpIyPAbYEkHvEmdkgzvufSLJYbwWCnLrxovRR/F2148 mLeOuTnhdEPBylSNeTV+5arMsWWWTUaGpcuPVcELm5tgUE9kNyo2sZNdjW1V7w/Hppdy /tXPuiYNRPUKB4kdrYYKxDw+iJb5h9cB52HRgcGIXrNLzHHiR3+PiH/grrZk4dajhIE8 W5nMqS3PDT5t5A4w+XgQ9LZBHdHW4Q00jSqBlOnNSAe56OKtYRBFkj25aCzKCRLLp6jd PVEQjpCpzZTC1vS8/8MmoNznQ+KgkMJbIo4YcUHvfrOKJc/hDp7kqg4dXlns59a8E4jE eiMw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.66.121.131 with SMTP id lk3mr27402285pab.43.1372080602757; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:30:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:30:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51C7DF70.6080602@gmail.com>
References:   <51C7DF70.6080602@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 14:30:02 +0100
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: Arturo Servin 
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b2e138dee4a3804dfe66879
Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity of IETF Leadership
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: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 13:30:07 -0000

--047d7b2e138dee4a3804dfe66879
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi Arturo,

The letter was to the IETF, so then we got the design team (DT)
established. The letter is the first input to the DT (my understandning).
The community submitted the letter and it provides the plan for the
requested objectives of the DT.

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Arturo Servin wrote:

> Abdussalam
>
>         This letter was not send by the DT, it was sent by a group of
> individuals interested in promoting diversity in the IETF. If I recall
> correctly it was sent a few days before the IAOC plenary in Orlando.
>
>         I would suggest to redirect your questions related to that letter
> to
> them at the email provided:
>
> ietf.diversity at gmail.com,
>
>         Regarding your other question:
>
> "Do I understand that IETF does not recognise me because I did not come
> to its meeting (remote participant)?"
>
>         I think that the IETF recognize all of us as participants even
> though
> we do not go to the face to face meetings.
>

I will say the IETF SHOULD recognize all of us. However, I am not sure what
happen. Please note that I already asked on the list of what is the plan of
DT and how they were selected, but no clear answer, so do you still feal
that the letter objectives recognized.

The letter states>
>> We also feel that more substantial and longer-term changes may be
>> needed to fully address this issue. Therefore, we request that the
>> new IETF Chair assemble a design team (with diverse membership, of
>> course) to determine the causes of this problem and to make
>> suggestions for longer-term solutions to be considered by the IETF.
>>
>>
>> We are committed to working within the IETF to make the changes
>> that are needed to correct this serious issue.

Still waiting for the requests of the letter,

AB

--047d7b2e138dee4a3804dfe66879
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Hi Arturo,
=A0
The letter was to =
the IETF, so then we got the design team (DT) established. The letter is th=
e first input to the DT (my understandning). The community submitted the le=
tter and it provides the plan for the requested objectives of the DT.



On Mon, Jun 24, 2=
013 at 6:56 AM, Arturo Servin <arturo.servin@gmail.com> wrote:


Abdussalam



=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 This letter was not send by the DT, it was sent by a group =
of

individuals interested in promoting diversity in the IETF. If I recall

correctly it was sent a few days before the IAOC plenary in Orlando.



=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 I would suggest to redirect your questions related to that =
letter to

them at the email provided:



ietf.diversity at gmail.com<=
/a>,



=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Regarding your other question:




"Do I understand that IETF does not recognise me because I did not com=
e

to its meeting (remote participant)?"




=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 I think that the IETF recognize all of us as particip=
ants even though

we do not go to the face to face meetings.
I will say the IETF SHOULD recognize all of us. However, I am not sure w=
hat happen. Please note that I already asked=A0on the list of what is the p=
lan of DT and how they were selected, but no clear answer, so do you still =
feal that the letter objectives=A0recognized.


=A0
The letter states>
>> We also feel th=
at more substantial and longer-term changes may be
>> needed to fu=
lly address this issue.  Therefore, we request that the
>> new IET=
F Chair assemble a design team (with diverse membership, of

>> course) to determine the causes of this problem and to make
>=
;> suggestions for longer-term solutions to be considered by the IETF.>>
>>
>> We are committed to working within the I=
ETF to make the changes

>> that are needed to correct this serious issue.
=A0
=

Still waiting for the requests of the letter,
=A0
=
AB
=A0





--047d7b2e138dee4a3804dfe66879--

From arturo.servin@gmail.com  Mon Jun 24 06:33:30 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 67C7921E80EE for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:33:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.099
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.500,  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 NR9vMUYL0Lp8 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:33:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-bk0-x22c.google.com (mail-bk0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4008:c01::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CF2521E80E9 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:33:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-bk0-f44.google.com with SMTP id r7so4270906bkg.31 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:33:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cQiGu+2yoVKimVgBdCIev8LDqbhVDB2ao8xaJXvAMD8=; b=tdWSS2PP0MjxQsMORlxQos2RjJ6IJBb6QPG9sOd/v+mghPV4LMRoTatsxlR3yBmJgm DMZ9Ae70jcp3RvX+PDK3lxBDPOOfPpzWHo2iI5bZccMS2PmBC40d5Da4RedMHs3DYxmA 3YkyeEs8yx+lmnS0+wUoTb7YCfvwDKheUiMBdNeQn4yVnNZpCIC7KeTFKq/uMcPrecVR 0nJTDQCHSQV+IH7b/Iqq+8emEaftM/EHAsoPWNdBXMtMgQmSvP82f6fpZ/MB5dMKLCUv sqZz/YM0wqOFT/BL0uoBW+1YHPp2K9e0uYQrAYP0gZ+kKjNwXF3ELViuGEi9ejq7rbSl gLGQ==
X-Received: by 10.204.2.200 with SMTP id 8mr3668450bkk.92.1372080807330; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:33:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.10] ([90.214.123.34]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ch16sm5123311bkb.17.2013.06.24.06.33.26 for  (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:33:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51C84AA5.50604@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 14:33:25 +0100
From: Arturo Servin 
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Abdussalam Baryun 
References:   <51C7DF70.6080602@gmail.com> 
In-Reply-To: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity of IETF Leadership
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: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 13:33:30 -0000

	Yes, that is clear.

	But you asked very specific questions about the letter, hence my
suggestion.

Regards,
as

On 6/24/13 2:30 PM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
> Hi Arturo,
>  
> The letter was to the IETF, so then we got the design team (DT)
> established. The letter is the first input to the DT (my
> understandning). The community submitted the letter and it provides the
> plan for the requested objectives of the DT.
> 
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Arturo Servin  > wrote:
> 
>     Abdussalam
> 
>             This letter was not send by the DT, it was sent by a group of
>     individuals interested in promoting diversity in the IETF. If I recall
>     correctly it was sent a few days before the IAOC plenary in Orlando.
> 
>             I would suggest to redirect your questions related to that
>     letter to
>     them at the email provided:
> 
>     ietf.diversity at gmail.com ,
> 
>             Regarding your other question:
> 
>     "Do I understand that IETF does not recognise me because I did not come
>     to its meeting (remote participant)?"
> 
>             I think that the IETF recognize all of us as participants
>     even though
>     we do not go to the face to face meetings.
> 
>  
> I will say the IETF SHOULD recognize all of us. However, I am not sure
> what happen. Please note that I already asked on the list of what is the
> plan of DT and how they were selected, but no clear answer, so do you
> still feal that the letter objectives recognized.
>  
> The letter states>
>>> We also feel that more substantial and longer-term changes may be
>>> needed to fully address this issue. Therefore, we request that the
>>> new IETF Chair assemble a design team (with diverse membership, of
>>> course) to determine the causes of this problem and to make
>>> suggestions for longer-term solutions to be considered by the IETF.
>>>
>>>
>>> We are committed to working within the IETF to make the changes
>>> that are needed to correct this serious issue.
>  
> Still waiting for the requests of the letter,
>  
> AB
>  
> 

From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Mon Jun 24 06:42:03 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 C670B21F92D3 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:42:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.611
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.611 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.988,  BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, 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 VroxDOQxS6w2 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:42:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x22a.google.com (mail-pa0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B70421F9298 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:42:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f42.google.com with SMTP id rl6so11056733pac.1 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:42:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=cYiaFOhScMJoP1Ry09yJRe3bNQQdQKqzrBMihz0xguk=; b=NJ3QoxXPXaGRmoBiPTcW4zUQeQCG0Rgg23Tqv0qxVp3XFTlkapF+IvoO9SDclvGAgg +p16UVHFhZNkZn7RJONABWk6lse2kr59KKeZ9Hj6rg3AH6zZ5iR3d5lz1VgPHG92JliJ 6BeqgCz6jr4/5ZEOqoQ0vQNvy66IT4IiInHtuxvLLxYngqnSx+N9v3xPNe2woO6vMlxR d5EPsPPXA3oPttLY3+2ZCyG6vY3uQrRDNtj4mV3bhEPg+yvLQ7hpqep4eX7BWzl7LqYv v4kiFZMIj5F5icSiQDmAImCbjY9M43U7eygdZdXBb2gcUnYSesZnL1BgNd6kYgflR/Cw cRbQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.68.114.226 with SMTP id jj2mr9965476pbb.142.1372081320754; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:42:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:42:00 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 14:42:00 +0100
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: "diversity@ietf.org" 
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b6d8052ba071c04dfe69307
Subject: [Diversity] Is there a known DT Plan (was Re: Who are the diversity design team)
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: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 13:42:03 -0000

--047d7b6d8052ba071c04dfe69307
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Reply to no plans known as mentioned in this link (was an answer to my
question of is there a plan):
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/diversity/current/msg00115.html

I suggest that the design team consider the plan/objectives below of the
letter sent to the IETF by many IETF participants.

> We also feel that more substantial and longer-term changes may be
> needed to fully address this issue.  Therefore, we request that the
> new IETF Chair assemble a design team (with diverse membership, of
> course) to determine the causes of this problem and to make
> suggestions for longer-term solutions to be considered by the IETF.
>
>
> We are committed to working within the IETF to make the changes
> that are needed to correct this serious issue.
I think now the plan is clear to me, but I don't exclude any new plans as
long it does not conflict with the above. Also agree with the below email
recommendation.

AB



On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 5:52 AM, Abdussalam Baryun <
abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 6/21/13, Hector Santos  wrote:
> > I suppose the "Design Team" is going to collect all the thoughts, bits
> > and bytes and produce possible a Diversity Problem Statement and
> > Recommendations in how the IETF can be improved by addressing certain
> > key problem areas.
>
> I support your idea, I also would request that the team plan should be
> produce a possible diversity problem statement and recommendations.
>
> AB
>

--047d7b6d8052ba071c04dfe69307
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Reply to no plans known as ment=
ioned in this link (was an answer to my question of is there a plan):
=

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/diver=
sity/current/msg00115.html


=A0
I suggest th=
at the design team consider the plan/objectives below of the letter sent to=
 the IETF by many=A0IETF participants.
=A0<=
/div>

> We also feel that more substantial and longer-term changes may be
&=
gt; needed to fully address this issue.=A0 Therefore, we request that the> new IETF Chair assemble a design team (with diverse membership, of
> course) to determine the causes of this problem and to make
> su=
ggestions for longer-term solutions to be considered by the IETF.
>>
> We are committed to working within the IETF to make the chan=
ges

> that are needed to correct this serious issue.
I think now the plan is clear to me, but I don't exclude a=
ny new plans as long it does not conflict with the above. Also agree with t=
he below email recommendation.


=A0
AB


=A0
On Sat, =
Jun 22, 2013 at 5:52 AM, Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmai=
l.com> wrote:


On 6/21/13, Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net> wrote:


> I suppose the "Design Team" is going to collect all the thou=
ghts, bits

> and bytes and produce possible a Diversity Problem Statement and

> Recommendations in how the IETF can be improved by addressing certain<=
br>
> key problem areas.




I support your idea, I also would request that the team plan should b=
e

produce a possible diversity problem statement and recommendations.



AB





--047d7b6d8052ba071c04dfe69307--

From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Mon Jun 24 06:50:25 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 E73EA21E80E0 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:50:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.634
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.634 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.965,  BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, 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 tKI0fwSrhSIk for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:50:25 -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 2D02A21F9B85 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:50:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f50.google.com with SMTP id wz7so10969778pbc.9 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:50:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=3nYyNjOCh/HMlnTNzWNdwLILFP5r5zJJhQFEdSDzWz4=; b=cHgIl1CbTQA0aF+vrzQ0avUfQY+vgWzPqS8sbK9PkcvABbZlq3HsLCtuH5St3NQxND lvF9TUuk17qZ0LYsxnSg7yyCqcGCoqAuAwzqF5VrFmPcoYOsBT6JhfF6Jf7vXfzgYIW8 EWi1P8KMl3/V1vFJamx5v9ImTGTL22Vqc5M9SXC5pnK1bl0D0yDAsKNfSQqyGaYDUmV2 VA7Cz9AZ14KDUYAKddcJIO4mRxREdyNqaWhiAFYfl3mTR6CCtCSfe+dvZMIL+upkz+bP CkYoIO4hjjWCdJnPg4iKaiYl52QxaG3nqi+lFFVpD84QAiaWxjmOeaOBtZoW8dxG/Hfk SrUQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.66.248.228 with SMTP id yp4mr27592048pac.158.1372081824887;  Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:50:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:50:24 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51C84AA5.50604@gmail.com>
References:   <51C7DF70.6080602@gmail.com>  <51C84AA5.50604@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 14:50:24 +0100
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: Arturo Servin 
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b15b2bdc67a4804dfe6b193
Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity of IETF Leadership
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: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 13:50:26 -0000

--047d7b15b2bdc67a4804dfe6b193
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi Arturo,

please read>
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg77723.html

The letter was sent to IETF list, so it was officially considered by me.
There was no refuse by management that the letter was not submitted to the
leadership of IETF or to IETF chair. Yes my questions were specific because
now I want to follow up with the letter. Is the letter considered or not.
How does that letter come into process, or who signed it? Does the
management still work on the lette, or they finished? I think my questions
and previous ones are reasonable for my further progress in the
volunteering the issues.

AB


On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Arturo Servin wrote:

>
>         Yes, that is clear.
>
>         But you asked very specific questions about the letter, hence my
> suggestion.
>
> Regards,
> as
>
> On 6/24/13 2:30 PM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
> > Hi Arturo,
> >
> > The letter was to the IETF, so then we got the design team (DT)
> > established. The letter is the first input to the DT (my
> > understandning). The community submitted the letter and it provides the
> > plan for the requested objectives of the DT.
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Arturo Servin  > > wrote:
> >
> >     Abdussalam
> >
> >             This letter was not send by the DT, it was sent by a group of
> >     individuals interested in promoting diversity in the IETF. If I
> recall
> >     correctly it was sent a few days before the IAOC plenary in Orlando.
> >
> >             I would suggest to redirect your questions related to that
> >     letter to
> >     them at the email provided:
> >
> >     ietf.diversity at gmail.com ,
> >
> >             Regarding your other question:
> >
> >     "Do I understand that IETF does not recognise me because I did not
> come
> >     to its meeting (remote participant)?"
> >
> >             I think that the IETF recognize all of us as participants
> >     even though
> >     we do not go to the face to face meetings.
> >
> >
> > I will say the IETF SHOULD recognize all of us. However, I am not sure
> > what happen. Please note that I already asked on the list of what is the
> > plan of DT and how they were selected, but no clear answer, so do you
> > still feal that the letter objectives recognized.
> >
> > The letter states>
> >>> We also feel that more substantial and longer-term changes may be
> >>> needed to fully address this issue. Therefore, we request that the
> >>> new IETF Chair assemble a design team (with diverse membership, of
> >>> course) to determine the causes of this problem and to make
> >>> suggestions for longer-term solutions to be considered by the IETF.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> We are committed to working within the IETF to make the changes
> >>> that are needed to correct this serious issue.
> >
> > Still waiting for the requests of the letter,
> >
> > AB
> >
> >
>

--047d7b15b2bdc67a4804dfe6b193
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Hi Arturo,
=A0


On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Arturo Servin <=
arturo.servin@gmail.com> wrote:




=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Yes, that is clear.



=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 But you asked very specific questions about the letter, hen=
ce my

suggestion.



Regards,

as




On 6/24/13 2:30 PM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:

> Hi Arturo,

>

> The letter was to the IETF, so then we got the design team (DT)

> established. The letter is the first input to the DT (my

> understandning). The community submitted the letter and it provides th=
e

> plan for the requested objectives of the DT.

>

> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Arturo Servin <arturo.servin@gmail.com


> <mailto:arturo.servin@gmail.com>> wrote:

>

> =A0 =A0 Abdussalam

>

> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 This letter was not send by the DT, it was sen=
t by a group of

> =A0 =A0 individuals interested in promoting diversity in the IETF. If =
I recall

> =A0 =A0 correctly it was sent a few days before the IAOC plenary in Or=
lando.

>

> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 I would suggest to redirect your questions rel=
ated to that

> =A0 =A0 letter to

> =A0 =A0 them at the email provided:

>


> =A0 =A0 ietf.diversity at gmail.com <h=
ttp://gmail.com>,


>

> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Regarding your other question:

>

> =A0 =A0 "Do I understand that IETF does not recognise me because =
I did not come

> =A0 =A0 to its meeting (remote participant)?"

>

> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 I think that the IETF recognize all of us as p=
articipants

> =A0 =A0 even though

> =A0 =A0 we do not go to the face to face meetings.

>

>

> I will say the IETF SHOULD recognize all of us. However, I am not sure=


> what happen. Please note that I already asked on the list of what is t=
he

> plan of DT and how they were selected, but no clear answer, so do you<=
br>
> still feal that the letter objectives recognized.

>

> The letter states>

>>> We also feel that more substantial and longer-term changes may=
 be

>>> needed to fully address this issue. Therefore, we request that=
 the

>>> new IETF Chair assemble a design team (with diverse membership=
, of

>>> course) to determine the causes of this problem and to make
>>> suggestions for longer-term solutions to be considered by the =
IETF.

>>>

>>>

>>> We are committed to working within the IETF to make the change=
s

>>> that are needed to correct this serious issue.

>

> Still waiting for the requests of the letter,

>

> AB

>

>





--047d7b15b2bdc67a4804dfe6b193--

From arturo.servin@gmail.com  Mon Jun 24 08:49:27 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 DE16611E8156 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 08:49:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.266
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.266 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.333,  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 I5wZP3Ij9mmv for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 08:49:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-bk0-x22c.google.com (mail-bk0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4008:c01::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B17921E811E for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 08:49:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-bk0-f44.google.com with SMTP id r7so4328317bkg.17 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 08:49:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=hyEBZlyUxWHNySAX5VcUi6Jtgpk+YwZqrkOVTpSCeSA=; b=xvTCD8oJqGAaY+fMgxztrTnfCudjA/JRRAckNflGk1zKkVfA8RJChpe+bhwOp6lHdb XeozyUcb9rFB76uYeSRo51soM8xRw8VZhv8qgRqd5JwlUZdtNdh176djwBco3ZJL8fLu yaFVhYLX5imMMV7MR0W2qlq9t3W35qYp3xWf4ah7NjCqCrVLsBcAfXBYESXMPUpvf2La jWnmUKBNj34kf0favjtqUXgn7p7CMZknKarTntDnNd7SphDIo1v6rG8kxvTt9fngMUcL hQN+mz4pV8jLYn+G7vRxS3cgG3iE78uYhz3yKkxcR3KoLzIwYRQwNReXw5RdnYE1UG3B kXrw==
X-Received: by 10.205.9.198 with SMTP id ox6mr3628716bkb.19.1372088964301; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 08:49:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.5] ([90.214.33.42]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id m6sm5366129bki.7.2013.06.24.08.49.23 for  (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 24 Jun 2013 08:49:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51C86A82.6030306@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 16:49:22 +0100
From: Arturo Servin 
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Abdussalam Baryun 
References:   <51C7DF70.6080602@gmail.com>  <51C84AA5.50604@gmail.com> 
In-Reply-To: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity of IETF Leadership
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: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 15:49:28 -0000

On 6/24/13 2:50 PM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
> Hi Arturo,
>  
> please read>
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg77723.html
>  
> The letter was sent to IETF list, so it was officially considered by me.
> There was no refuse by management that the letter was not submitted to
> the leadership of IETF or to IETF chair. Yes my questions were specific
> because now I want to follow up with the letter. Is the letter
> considered or not. 

	As part of DT but replying as individual I think so.

How does that letter come into process,

	I think it is just an input that there are some people worried about
diversity in the IETF.

or who signed
> it? 

	I do not know, ask the people that created the letter.

Does the management still work on the lette, or they finished?

	Which management? that letter was not sent by the IESG if that is your
question.

I
> think my questions and previous ones are reasonable for my further
> progress in the volunteering the issues.

	I do not know, ask yourself.

>  
> AB
> 


regards,
as

From sm@resistor.net  Mon Jun 24 10:40:44 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 A888321E8118 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 10:40:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.54
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.54 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.059, 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 TNA2eR4Fz4y5 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 10:40:43 -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 35D2821E8144 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 10:40:32 -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 r5OHeMPi003575; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 10:40:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1372095627; bh=Tw+TeZB868N7PhcLnnobuI+vKNpFrvxprNe2O5WR1qo=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=soE80qyAUCN/EpbqAxoqfH21dVCitVAzY6srXN5RELXBFyLOlN3UL0uMSiZzkR0q2 aPJoF6aBcjGNq9PtjdCK3j8d/XW7+GKCSmluVVlIsielRluVVBgXlXICrGdToRX5C5 DlMsK2UzmGqSTutJ3tMBHLI2Ycpc9pHrXqCKtUws=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1372095627; i=@resistor.net; bh=Tw+TeZB868N7PhcLnnobuI+vKNpFrvxprNe2O5WR1qo=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=XWqwDFVa5Z+PQjUu67H+Mpx3HrWPi6+8v7kmd9jkjeNFRSKFWdF7g74R970A6PnAM y0SzpeN8lPrjI4fCmqNR/6Bb3lkunbvo4smyKkr4VI8hlCw35fl7ME8af3pjWgu18r ILR6cbmIEgq6zQwUbT5IUaDhVHq6trG3vD1rAbX4=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130624101605.0ca736e8@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 10:37:39 -0700
To: diversity@ietf.org
From: SM 
In-Reply-To: 
References: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: IETF Diversity 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity of IETF Leadership
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: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 17:40:44 -0000

At 03:22 10-03-2013, IETF Diversity wrote:
>We also feel that more substantial and longer-term changes may be
>needed to fully address this issue.  Therefore, we request that the
>new IETF Chair assemble a design team (with diverse membership, of
>course) to determine the causes of this problem and to make
>suggestions for longer-term solutions to be considered by the IETF.
>
>We are committed to working within the IETF to make the changes
>that are needed to correct this serious issue.
>
>Best Regards,
>
>(In alphabetical order)
>
>Bernard Aboba
>Cathy Aronson
>Alia Atlas
>Mary Barnes
>Mohamed Boucadair
>Brian Carpenter
>Stuart Cheshire
>Alissa Cooper
>Spencer Dawkins
>Roni Even
>Janet Gunn
>Stephen Hanna
>Ted Hardie
>Sam Hartman
>Fangwei Hu
>Geoff Huston
>Christian Jacquenet
>Mirjam Kuehne
>Olaf Kolkman
>Suresh Krishnan
>Barry Leiba
>Ted Lemon
>Kepeng Li
>Dapeng Liu
>Allison Mankin
>Bill Manning
>Kathleen Moriarty
>Monique Morrow
>Nurani Nimpuno
>Matt Nottingham
>Erik Nordmark
>Karen O'Donoghue
>Iuniana Oprescu
>Jaqueline Queiroz
>Hosnieh Rafiee
>Pete Resnick
>Lea Roberts
>Simon Pietro Romano
>Peter Saint-Andre
>Eve Schooler
>Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
>Larissa Shapiro
>Melinda Shore
>Barbara Stark
>Brian Trammel
>Tina Tsou
>Justin Uberti
>Margaret Wasserman
>Renee Wilson-Burstein
>James Woodyatt
>Lucy Yong
>Jessica Yu
>Lixia Zhang

A quick look at the diversity mailing list archive shows messages 
from Spencer Dawkins, Barry Leiba and Barbara Stark only.  Could the 
persons who signed the above letter (excluding Suresh and Kathleen, 
and the persons who have already provided input) provide some input 
(see http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg80076.html )?

It would, in my opinion, reassure the IETF Community if it can see 
that these persons are committed to working within the IETF to make 
the changes that are needed to correct what they consider as a serious issue.

Regards,
-sm


From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Tue Jun 25 00:56:42 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 DAAFA21E8086 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 00:56:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.657
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.657 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.943,  BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, 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 w5sXTczWq1FC for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 00:56:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-x235.google.com (mail-pb0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F9DC21E805D for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 00:56:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f53.google.com with SMTP id xb12so12116201pbc.40 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 00:56:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Kxq1pSOBWNokMmZ+cOfJ54XtwAiMZTE5Lngm5eJrtw8=; b=M/jC2PSOig6DE+lu/RgquSI/lcrJccz3kesaCDhImtBrF/8QpR5z4K0XamKpUkof85 cr3soCqpOgBIjZfvN4AJCwM/3YGmbxnXuSjp2u/GM0mzc50/oWmRO7POoQLD+n92cw2I 87z2O4gDpGXrWDjanTZOG+kS3TN6t/rtaHaGd2F1Q+LDvrFuM67WgLcQfUUzM1KM/0PT rhKqNOFyGDDZjRO0lN/YZaeSMxGlw89rpbEv5B+g/jAUYoOdB5n8hiO0QS6TSxTnnpdu rUdBAm5YSpqqgNRsBi44lqfENG54Ye7etifeW17ez7BI4hSHi68Eii0KftABvrtxFLSe nhmQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.66.164.71 with SMTP id yo7mr31463363pab.92.1372147000252; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 00:56:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 00:56:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130624101605.0ca736e8@resistor.net>
References:  <6.2.5.6.2.20130624101605.0ca736e8@resistor.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 09:56:40 +0200
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: SM 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: IETF Diversity , diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity of IETF Leadership
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: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 07:56:42 -0000

Thanks SM, I agree with you, but I was discussing with someone on this
list that I want see the letter status for many reasons including
yours. I signed the letter and already gave input and still
volunteering, but still waiting the design team to provide me with the
letter status.

AB

On 6/24/13, SM  wrote:
> At 03:22 10-03-2013, IETF Diversity wrote:
>>We also feel that more substantial and longer-term changes may be
>>needed to fully address this issue.  Therefore, we request that the
>>new IETF Chair assemble a design team (with diverse membership, of
>>course) to determine the causes of this problem and to make
>>suggestions for longer-term solutions to be considered by the IETF.
>>
>>We are committed to working within the IETF to make the changes
>>that are needed to correct this serious issue.
>>
>>Best Regards,
>>
>>(In alphabetical order)
>>
>>Bernard Aboba
>>Cathy Aronson
>>Alia Atlas
>>Mary Barnes
>>Mohamed Boucadair
>>Brian Carpenter
>>Stuart Cheshire
>>Alissa Cooper
>>Spencer Dawkins
>>Roni Even
>>Janet Gunn
>>Stephen Hanna
>>Ted Hardie
>>Sam Hartman
>>Fangwei Hu
>>Geoff Huston
>>Christian Jacquenet
>>Mirjam Kuehne
>>Olaf Kolkman
>>Suresh Krishnan
>>Barry Leiba
>>Ted Lemon
>>Kepeng Li
>>Dapeng Liu
>>Allison Mankin
>>Bill Manning
>>Kathleen Moriarty
>>Monique Morrow
>>Nurani Nimpuno
>>Matt Nottingham
>>Erik Nordmark
>>Karen O'Donoghue
>>Iuniana Oprescu
>>Jaqueline Queiroz
>>Hosnieh Rafiee
>>Pete Resnick
>>Lea Roberts
>>Simon Pietro Romano
>>Peter Saint-Andre
>>Eve Schooler
>>Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
>>Larissa Shapiro
>>Melinda Shore
>>Barbara Stark
>>Brian Trammel
>>Tina Tsou
>>Justin Uberti
>>Margaret Wasserman
>>Renee Wilson-Burstein
>>James Woodyatt
>>Lucy Yong
>>Jessica Yu
>>Lixia Zhang
>
> A quick look at the diversity mailing list archive shows messages
> from Spencer Dawkins, Barry Leiba and Barbara Stark only.  Could the
> persons who signed the above letter (excluding Suresh and Kathleen,
> and the persons who have already provided input) provide some input
> (see http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg80076.html )?
>
> It would, in my opinion, reassure the IETF Community if it can see
> that these persons are committed to working within the IETF to make
> the changes that are needed to correct what they consider as a serious
> issue.
>
> Regards,
> -sm
>
> _______________________________________________
> diversity mailing list
> diversity@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>

From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Tue Jun 25 01:35:30 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 8C95B21F9E7C for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 01:35:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.674
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.674 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.926,  BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, 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 jUfReMh4TBZH for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 01:35:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-x230.google.com (mail-pb0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9672A21F9EA6 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 01:35:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f48.google.com with SMTP id ma3so12239861pbc.35 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 01:35:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=hToBm0Z0GSPh/9nQuzn94XuwwhncDyo9QwlJgLQqXCM=; b=XnMOCAsmgY0syU3vPZ6QMF8rgIZpylHw6di6wzILepjhwSGJK7NZlkgHfr1ivYpjVO PYqgQawiG0uw/8aqkOofBo6h2adYvJIYpyUo/6hC59vJ9rxuH9q5TjF83xuBli4qRgz5 wbtmCpoyVyE6+VwC1D6zThxdK2bZMZu3uyJWBVrVcW8CzrjJ/CCxwFAE/+vX6NTeovc9 pWHb4nDo4GEqgNjCDGt9NflAvqgUMDIyYgJLx1XZmOnssbz6HKbp2nuu2BUAItF8iD4t +copQxAZwbA2FeC6F5sKA3a0+JGB8WzksQpCyGAxxhOrOBTUIyWaJo9l5iRosyeP8bVD zFCw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.68.52.10 with SMTP id p10mr13840468pbo.92.1372149322354; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 01:35:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 01:35:22 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130624101605.0ca736e8@resistor.net>
References:  <6.2.5.6.2.20130624101605.0ca736e8@resistor.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 10:35:22 +0200
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: SM 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: IETF Diversity , diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity of IETF Leadership
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: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 08:35:30 -0000

On 6/24/13, SM  wrote:
> A quick look at the diversity mailing list archive shows messages
> from Spencer Dawkins, Barry Leiba and Barbara Stark only.  Could the
> persons who signed the above letter

Did the letter get a responded letter from Leadership or from IESG, or
was the letter ignored or deleted? Did the persons subscribed to this
diversity list or did they still not aware of the status and waiting
on the IETF list for the waiting respond. I expected to get a respond
from management refering to the letter we submitted

> It would, in my opinion, reassure the IETF Community if it can see
> that these persons are committed to working within the IETF to make
> the changes that are needed to correct what they consider as a serious
> issue.

This list is not the place to reassure IETF community, I think the
IETF list is the place. I recommend you (as design team request) send
a post to IETF list refering to here.

AB

From bs7652@att.com  Tue Jun 25 05:51:33 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 A39CD21F9F6B for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 05:51:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.599
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 H8atkDzchpXf for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 05:51:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com (nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com [209.65.160.93]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F046721F9E82 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 05:51:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unknown [144.160.20.145] (EHLO nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com) by nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com(mxl_mta-6.15.0-1) with ESMTP id 34299c15.76969940.2572279.00-503.7149268.nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com (envelope-from );  Tue, 25 Jun 2013 12:51:15 +0000 (UTC)
X-MXL-Hash: 51c9924308a81fb1-926f1105c5aa4ef4178c16b923ba2403ce8379fd
Received: from unknown [144.160.20.145] (EHLO mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com) by nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com(mxl_mta-6.15.0-1) over TLS secured channel with ESMTP id 24299c15.0.2572272.00-454.7149234.nbfkord-smmo07.seg.att.com (envelope-from );  Tue, 25 Jun 2013 12:51:14 +0000 (UTC)
X-MXL-Hash: 51c99242629e9d84-8fb9dd06d5aafc30bb937eabe6275e68dba11c15
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 r5PCpDdX005201; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 08:51:13 -0400
Received: from alpi131.aldc.att.com (alpi131.aldc.att.com [130.8.218.69]) by mlpd192.enaf.sfdc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r5PCp4T5005074 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 25 Jun 2013 08:51:07 -0400
Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUB9D.ITServices.sbc.com (gaalpa1msghub9d.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.36.90]) by alpi131.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor); Tue, 25 Jun 2013 12:50:50 GMT
Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.36.69]) by GAALPA1MSGHUB9D.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.36.90]) with mapi id 14.02.0342.003; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 08:50:59 -0400
From: "STARK, BARBARA H" 
To: Abdussalam Baryun 
Thread-Topic: The Letter
Thread-Index: Ac5xoqLMbTLHI3YCQ46SLpKSVCjLXw==
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 12:50:58 +0000
Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302EFF60@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [130.10.166.95]
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=R92076tX c=1 sm=0 a=ZRNLZ4dFUbCvG8UMqPvVAA==:17 a]
X-AnalysisOut: [=issRFcAWqU0A:10 a=ofMgfj31e3cA:10 a=BLceEmwcHowA:10 a=kj9]
X-AnalysisOut: [zAlcOel0A:10 a=zQP7CpKOAAAA:8 a=XIqpo32RAAAA:8 a=BdYb8L6sR]
X-AnalysisOut: [Lywnk1WdFAA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10]
Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" 
Subject: [Diversity] The Letter
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: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 12:51:34 -0000

> Thanks SM, I agree with you, but I was discussing with someone on this li=
st
> that I want see the letter status for many reasons including yours. I sig=
ned
> the letter and already gave input and still volunteering, but still waiti=
ng the
> design team to provide me with the letter status.

IMO, as one of the people who signed the letter, I considered the creation =
of the design team and this email list to be the response to the letter and=
 the issues it raised. I see no need for any additional response to it. I w=
ould prefer to move on with providing the design team with constructive and=
 useful input (above and beyond what was in the letter), rather than demand=
ing an additional (more formal?) response to the letter. I would see the wr=
iting of such a response to be unnecessary "busy work", and would be oppose=
d to adding it as a design team deliverable. Or as a deliverable for anyone=
 else.

My view of letter status: The letter is a historical artifact that helped g=
et us to the point where we are now, and that continues to serve as an inpu=
t to the efforts of the design team.
Barbara

From arturo.servin@gmail.com  Tue Jun 25 06:00:10 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 A179721F9C4D for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 06:00:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.400,  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 yM9dprLbFRZ4 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 06:00:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-bk0-x22f.google.com (mail-bk0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4008:c01::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADD1621F9C3B for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 06:00:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-bk0-f47.google.com with SMTP id jg1so4433889bkc.20 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 06:00:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3PclkRskzhfN5OENGiYJXlb5gBX8GXg/WVA7baB2XGU=; b=OAEqnjVNm0acVQQUtD/LbPkUh/qJEbgSPVypxe1W96mqXiFYAyJhHOvZs06KFGqiJw /GgCgqsTvpewc/uaq2oICrUeQbfHWDSZ2BHRawt7PjCPdLjbcZHlmBHs/hYdJlff2Rqi PcD0C1We6WDgwJzB541it56K9ZA55TybPXiqU08orsLFu6qMGuJAsejqGDSMJgfYHr+3 +PphhpMySNpc6vUFk0XjePLGCRH5bC8/UGuU75x5OetlpC2yJh/nzSqqcCErLrYkUfVD oQXQCwCYO8XWf62h5P33e/X0mJtje1raIHf5dpV6omxgcHhkXwRDqZaCBlfMSTTG21IQ gjzQ==
X-Received: by 10.204.60.142 with SMTP id p14mr44625bkh.11.1372165208752; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 06:00:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.5] ([90.214.33.42]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id lb14sm6158524bkb.6.2013.06.25.06.00.07 for  (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 25 Jun 2013 06:00:07 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51C99454.3050809@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 14:00:04 +0100
From: Arturo Servin 
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "STARK, BARBARA H" 
References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302EFF60@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com>
In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302EFF60@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , Abdussalam Baryun 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] The Letter
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: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 13:00:10 -0000

	Thanks Barbara.

	I was trying to articulate a response and you just did it perfectly.

Regards,
as

On 6/25/13 1:50 PM, STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
>> Thanks SM, I agree with you, but I was discussing with someone on this list
>> that I want see the letter status for many reasons including yours. I signed
>> the letter and already gave input and still volunteering, but still waiting the
>> design team to provide me with the letter status.
> 
> IMO, as one of the people who signed the letter, I considered the creation of the design team and this email list to be the response to the letter and the issues it raised. I see no need for any additional response to it. I would prefer to move on with providing the design team with constructive and useful input (above and beyond what was in the letter), rather than demanding an additional (more formal?) response to the letter. I would see the writing of such a response to be unnecessary "busy work", and would be opposed to adding it as a design team deliverable. Or as a deliverable for anyone else.
> 
> My view of letter status: The letter is a historical artifact that helped get us to the point where we are now, and that continues to serve as an input to the efforts of the design team.
> Barbara
> _______________________________________________
> diversity mailing list
> diversity@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
> 

From jari.arkko@piuha.net  Tue Jun 25 06:13:42 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 5C9D421F9E4E for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 06:13:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.545
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.545 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.054, 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 Uk2tke5GK3ii for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 06:13:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09C6321F9E0D for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 06:13:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 213372CC48; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:13:36 +0300 (EEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DpIfj-RZ4Auh; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:13:35 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from www.piuha.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8C992CC56; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:13:34 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from 87.94.46.33 (SquirrelMail authenticated user jarkko) by www.piuha.net with HTTP; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 13:13:34 -0000
Message-ID: <71293af972a5edccbf5d9bef9e8352d9.squirrel@www.piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <51C99454.3050809@gmail.com>
References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302EFF60@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com> <51C99454.3050809@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 13:13:34 -0000
From: jari.arkko@piuha.net
To: "Arturo Servin" 
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.23 [SVN]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , "STARK, BARBARA H" , Abdussalam Baryun 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] The Letter
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: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 13:13:42 -0000

And Barbara's mail feels like the right way to think about this from my
perspective as well. I responded at IETF-86 that we will set up the team
and as discussed recently on ietf@ietf list, we ate also looking at other
actions. But it will take time - so lets get to work :-)

Jari



From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com  Thu Jun 27 04:42:49 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 9153921F9CD3 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 04:42:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.6
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, 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 bPCmmPPE9cyF for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 04:42:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-x235.google.com (mail-pb0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 200C121F979E for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 04:42:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f53.google.com with SMTP id xb12so791292pbc.40 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 04:42:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Rm9JUJ+J4xv7uJPTsoiwijRMql5+TYvAmQn1Jt2SY10=; b=p5/G7Sdv44dcFZbH+tmCjL7+YbSka8Au76i+yrEkvFdMPEeM/iMnIZYaohP4yJCxsV YmNac7Qh8oBj4kD2Zq0C1rGs8Q9KZAcaF6IUV7mmn0fJAgrFozjNNNbBlUTWcU3bWsyu 5uPH2OodPLD5j6qSOH39Qkft3KlNicFIhEHKgYK0b4jWRqdKV8KBpl2J4Ob05zfIf4j3 i6PjUheK1+ybaXWN1ajA1f6k9iH/OXo3Voq0ouV5UC2Ht5JADxnrqZWbwewbNfEst3jb 9sNanddxUhQacrAP1q7GjwM3ziRvCi1KRtBq6AJ19UiDmMO4CdMh3EezgH2evSTNNb7e Ld6w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.68.179.99 with SMTP id df3mr5600273pbc.198.1372333368892; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 04:42:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.78.164 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 04:42:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302EFF60@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com>
References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E611302EFF60@GAALPA1MSGUSR9L.ITServices.sbc.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 13:42:48 +0200
Message-ID: 
From: Abdussalam Baryun 
To: "STARK, BARBARA H" 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" 
Subject: Re: [Diversity] The Letter
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, 27 Jun 2013 11:42:49 -0000

Hi Barbara,

I think the approach you proposed is different than the letter, I
think now the design team is serving IETF management, and the
management is serving the community. I wanted that both the design
team and the IETF management SERVE the community. I asked before what
was the plan and objectives of the team, but no clear answer, however,
I agree we need to progress and do more interesting work after
objectives are clear.

AB

On 6/25/13, STARK, BARBARA H  wrote:
>> Thanks SM, I agree with you, but I was discussing with someone on this
>> list
>> that I want see the letter status for many reasons including yours. I
>> signed
>> the letter and already gave input and still volunteering, but still
>> waiting the
>> design team to provide me with the letter status.
>
> IMO, as one of the people who signed the letter, I considered the creation
> of the design team and this email list to be the response to the letter and
> the issues it raised. I see no need for any additional response to it. I
> would prefer to move on with providing the design team with constructive and
> useful input (above and beyond what was in the letter), rather than
> demanding an additional (more formal?) response to the letter. I would see
> the writing of such a response to be unnecessary "busy work", and would be
> opposed to adding it as a design team deliverable. Or as a deliverable for
> anyone else.
>
> My view of letter status: The letter is a historical artifact that helped
> get us to the point where we are now, and that continues to serve as an
> input to the efforts of the design team.
> Barbara
>