Re: Mentoring

On 3/18/2013 2:34 PM, Arturo Servin wrote:
>         Yes and no.
>
>         I would get rid of all the dots, possible yes.
In general, I like the scope of what's being questioned in the past week 
or so, even if the answer comes back "we talked about this, and the 
other stuff we could think of was worse" :-)
On dots, specifically ... I'm guessing from context that you're thinking 
red/IAB, yellow/IESG, blue/WG chairs, and possibly pink (technically the 
IRSG, but almost all the IRSG members are also RG chairs, so in this 
case, pink is like yellow and blue, mixed together).
There are dots, and then there are dots. The one I'd like to see 
continued the most is the orange dot, for Nomcom members. We choose the 
voting members at random out of a volunteer pool, with some 
qualifications but not a lot, for a specific duration. Perhaps there's 
value in helping the community identify Nomcom members quickly during 
breaks, etc.
For several years, I've scheduled meetings with Nomcom during their 
office hours, but I'm usually providing input on 10-20 willing nominees. 
It might be helpful for someone to chat with a Nomcom member and give 
feedback on one or two willing nominees in just a few minutes - that's 
what I'm talking about.
If the IAOC continues to hold open sessions at future IETF meetings, 
that's good; if not, perhaps there's value in helping the community 
identify IAOC members quickly, too.
For extra credit, picking a color that's easier to identify distinctly 
would help (I can't consistently tell the difference between 
"purple/IAOC member" and "blue/WG Chair" unless someone is wearing both).
IIRC, the green Local Host dots were intended to help people who weren't 
familiar with a meeting site find someone who was familiar with that 
site. Now that we have an IAOC, and attendees lists and meeting wikis, 
and a larger and more visible secretariat, green dots may have more 
value as recognition for meeting sponsors (and if giving out green dots 
matters to people who support the IETF financially, that's certainly 
sufficient as a reason to keep them!).
Just keep thinking carefully, as people are doing, and developing a 
better understanding about what we are doing and why it might have been 
our practice in the past ... and whether it's still a good idea now.
Thanks,

Spencer

>         The new attendee tag, not sure. May change it for a dot.
>
>         The tags is useful to identify new people and help. A mentor tag or dot
> would be useful to people for not thinking that you are a weirdo trying
> to make conversation.
>
>         We need to get rid of old traditions if they do not longer apply, but
> also we need to subtle identify people willing to help and people that
> may need some help.
>
> Regards,
> as
>
> On 3/18/13 3:14 PM, SM wrote:
> > 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.