At 06:44 18-03-2013, Carlos M. Martinez wrote:
- I support a newcomers' list. However, I do believe that the definition
of newcomer must be relaxed a bit. A newcomer is not a 'first time
attendee'. Being a IETF youngster I would say that for the first three
meetings you are a newcomer. This may vary, but if I had to draw a line
somewhere, three would be my choice.
I suggest calling the mailing list hallway(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org or else use
edu-team(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org. I don't see any reason why "new" has to be defined.
- Breakfasts / lunch meetings are great, but they are not enough. These
slots might need some augmentation. I don't have many ideas except
dinners and parallel slots while the WGs sessions are in progress.
I suggest increasing the duration of the breaks. If you formalize a
lunch meeting, for example, it will be engineered for perfection. It
will end up being uninteresting (see Meet-and-Greet thread).
- However tempting, I don't think ADs / WG chairs are ideal mentoring
choices. During the IETF week they are drenched in work with their "area
directoring"/ "working group chairing" duties and most of them won't
have a lot of time for meeting newcomers and attending to their needs.
Yes.
- Mentors SHOULD be notified of their duties within reasonable time, and
preferably be introduced to their 'pupils' via private email. I don't
know how hard this would be to implement, but it would definitely help.
Another thing to keep in mind: Do all newcomers want being mentored? I
can think of one or two cases I know personally that probably wouldn't
want a mentor.
Seiichi Kawamura mentioned that it is about peer environment. The
idea of mentorship seems to be about having new people listening
religiously to old people explaining how things should work. If the
IETF thinks that it is a good idea I will opt out as I believe that I
will be considering people are inferior if I do that.
- Moving the newcomers reception to later in the week is a MUST. Mentors
should obviously be also invited to this reception.
Murray Kucherawy mentioned that newcomers reception is used to take
care of business (the people who regularly attend meetings discuss
about IETF work).
At 05:42 18-03-2013, Jari Arkko wrote:
Not sure if that should be the winners or losers :-)
I don't like the idea of winners and losers.
Seriously though, I am roughly in the same camp as Seiichi. The real
introduction of someone into the IETF is mostly about finding
discussion partners around the reason why the person came to the
IETF to begin with. Most of the time these would be peers within a
working group. Like-minded vendors, customers or researchers. Not
everyone who comes to the IETF for the first time is a beginner,
they may for instance be established engineers on their fields, and
just coming to the IETF to accomplish a goal. We discuss very
interesting topics at the IESG and IAB, but I think the more
direct way to introduce someone to the IETF "network" is to connect
the person with others who work in the same topic. And maybe create
some real co-operation between those people, building additional
reasons for the person to continue to join our meetings.
Agreed.
As an aside, from personal experience, small, targeted meetings with
newcomers have tended to work better for me than otherwise.
Yes.
I would get rid of the dots. It seems that the IETF has been
perpetuating rituals for no reason other than it is tradition (it is
how things were done before). I would get rid of the "new attendee"
tag as it creates different categories of individuals.
Regards,
-sm
P.S. "If your system of finding people to hire, speakers for your
stage, or members for your board depends on having them step forward
and ask, you've effectively institutionalized a bias."