Re: Remote participants, newcomers, and tutorials

(Dropping a few lists from the distribution.)

Brian, Dave,

> It reads rudely when taken out of context. But try reading the whole
> paragraph in RFC 3184:
>
>      IETF participants who attend Working Group meetings read the
>      relevant Internet-Drafts, RFCs, and e-mail archives beforehand, in
>      order to familiarize themselves with the technology under
>      discussion.  This may represent a challenge for newcomers, as e-
>      mail archives can be difficult to locate and search, and it may
>      not be easy to trace the history of longstanding Working Group
>      debates.  With that in mind, newcomers who attend Working Group
>      meetings are encouraged to observe and absorb whatever material
>      they can, but should not interfere with the ongoing process of the
>      group.  Working Group meetings run on a very limited time
>      schedule, and are not intended for the education of individuals.
>      The work of the group will continue on the mailing list, and many
>      questions would be better expressed on the list in the months that
>      follow.
>
> Exactly. My experience back when I was a newcomer was that it was
> easy enough to ask beginner's questions after the meeting, and obviously
> wrong to do so during the session. This remains true years later, if I
> drop into a WG that I'm not familiar with.
Let me clarify why I thought it was wrong. I don't think I'm disagreeing with 
you, actually. I do agree that asking beginner questions in a working group 
meeting would be inappropriate. And I agree that the meetings are not a place 
for education. And I agree that we should not become an organisation where the 
f2f time gets the primary role.

However. Newcomers are not all alike. The student coming here to observe the 
IETF. The researcher who understands the field we are embarking on. The 
colleague that has been implementing The Protocol for the last two years in the 
office, but is now coming to the IETF for the first time. The guy who has 
something to say about the operational experience of our results. The team who 
brought their idea to the IETF to be standardised. And so on.

Jari (the guy who is preparing for the possibility - no matter how  remote - 
that the cool kids might actually teach us a trick or two) :-)