Mr. Keith Moore:
For the record, could you describe what you do for a living ?
Jim Fleming
http://www.unir.com
http://www.unir.com/images/architech.gif
http://www.unir.com/images/address.gif
http://www.unir.com/images/headers.gif
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-poised(_at_)lists(_dot_)tislabs(_dot_)com
[mailto:owner-poised(_at_)lists(_dot_)tislabs(_dot_)com]On Behalf Of Keith Moore
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 11:09 AM
To: John Leslie
Cc: John C Klensin; poised(_at_)lists(_dot_)tislabs(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: Wandering in the Weeds
No really, _why_ would IESG think that shutting down a group is
called for when they seem to be wandering in the weeds?
because the longer a group exists, the more likely it is that the mailing
list contains a disproportionate number of people who don't do much useful
work and (apparently) have nothing better to do with their time than to
argue about proposals that don't concern them.
in other words, folks who are interested in doing useful work tend to be
busy
doing useful work, and due to time constraints (and sometimes disgust) they
tend
to opt-out of participation in groups that aren't focused and therefore are
not getting much work done, leaving the discussion to be dominated by folks
who
are less interested in doing useful work.
shutting down an existing group helps dispel the public mis-perception that
the group is actually making progress and/or doing something useful.
and newly formed groups tend to stay (relatively) focused for a year or two.
thus, shutting down a group is often a constructive activity.
in my experience (mostly in the apps area) any group that's been around for
longer than two years has about a 90% probability of wandering in the weeds.
Keith
