ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Proposed statement quotes wrong numbers

2003-10-29 09:43:31
I would agree in as much as the metric for the productivity of a
programmer is KLOC.

I don't think you could define a unique e-mail in any sense of the word
- and even then, know the quality of the technical opinion behind that
e-mail address.

Bill

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org [mailto:owner-ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On 
Behalf Of todd
glassey
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 9:57 PM
To: bill
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Proposed statement quotes wrong numbers


Bill - you are missing the picture. The ultimate number of bodies that
the IETF can count on are those unique email addresses. No one said they
were any particular Vetting Initiative but rather the total possible
number of "representative opinions" that any consensus could possibly
count on - assuming an "across the Organizational breadth" as the
metric.

The IETF is supposed to be representative of the people of the world and
their representatives to the task of building Internet protocols, right?
So then the unique email addresses are a direct metric on how well the
world is represented. Wouldn't you say?

Todd


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "bill" <bill(_at_)strahm(_dot_)net>
To: "'todd glassey'" <todd(_dot_)glassey(_at_)worldnet(_dot_)att(_dot_)net>
Cc: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 7:46 PM
Subject: RE: Proposed statement quotes wrong numbers


I disagree with your analysis todd.

The strength of the IETF is not in the number of unique e-mail address

on its e-mail lists (define unique - I have subscribed from probably 
10 e-mail addresses over the years - many people I know are subscribed

with multiple "unique" addresses - many address in reality point to 
archiving services, other reflectors, peoples inboxes that don't look 
at the e-mail

Thats a problem with the Registration Process then.


So I don't think you can even count the number of unique e-mail 
addresses - but if you could -

Peoples technical content/quality very widely, some input is worthless

(or close to it) and many just monitor what is going on... Other 
e-mail is critical - either in technical content, providing an 
alternative viewpoint etc.

What has that to do with how many possible opinions are available
herein?


The strength of the IETF is that it is a gathering point for all of 
these people.

You mean the mailing lists right? - so count the members...

 Not a quantity of e-mail addresses that can be spammed or something 
else

Bill -  you have not discounted or invalidated anything I have said
here. My comment stands.


Bill

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org [mailto:owner-ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] 
On Behalf Of 
todd glassey
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 5:09 PM
To: Bruce Campbell
Cc: Harald Tveit Alvestrand; Christian Huitema; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; 
problem-statement(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no
Subject: Re: Proposed statement quotes wrong numbers


Bruce -
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Campbell" <bruce(_dot_)campbell(_at_)ripe(_dot_)net>
To: "todd glassey" <todd(_dot_)glassey(_at_)worldnet(_dot_)att(_dot_)net>
Cc: "Harald Tveit Alvestrand" <harald(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no>; "Christian
Huitema" <huitema(_at_)windows(_dot_)microsoft(_dot_)com>; 
<ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>;
<problem-statement(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no>
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 1:59 AM
Subject: Re: Proposed statement quotes wrong numbers


On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, todd glassey wrote:

What was the attendance of the last meeting then? and also what 
then

is
the
sum total of unique EMail Addresses in the Lists then too? I.e. 
what

is
the
total size of the Vetting Community Resource that the IETF brings 
to

the Party as an enterprise/org???

Are you sure that you can count the (large) number of subscribers 
that

are on the main IETF lists, and the umpteen WG lists, as 
participants?

participants as far as meetings are concerned? no - obviously not, but

this pool of good email addresses constitute the core value of the 
IETF, that being its Vettig Pool. So yes indeed, and also remember 
that the IETF is a voluntary particpation standards process and 
platform, and that the reliable email addresses for this "Vetting 
Pool" is what the core of the IETF's ideas are vetted against. So put 
on your "organizational leader's" hat and then ask me the same 
question -

There
seem to be a lot of people who are subscribed to various 
IETF-related lists who do not seem to participate in the IETF 
discussions.

But the point is that they have the option. Its their choice as to 
whether to participate of not.


( But theres still a lot more than just 700 people who participate 
in
the
  IETF )

I agree - so lets ask the question again, how many unique names are 
there in the lists - what's the total 'verified email addresses' that 
make up the total of the vetting pool? - 5000 - 10000 - 50000? what is

it? Harald? - this seems like a number that you as the Chair of the 
IETF would not only be proud of, but would also have on the top of 
your head on a monthly basis... Any ideas as to the number?

Todd



--==--
Bruce.