ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Charging remote participants

2013-08-26 10:57:46
From: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
Date: 08/25/2013 08:40 AM

...
The reward/motivation from IETF to participants is to 
acknowledge in writting their efforts, which I think still the IETF 
management still does not motivate/encourage. 

I COMPLETELY disagree with this.  The reward/motivation for participation 
(remotely or in person) is to have your comments, ideas, suggestions,... 
TAKEN SERIOUSLY, even if the eventual decision goes "against you".

Of course, that presupposes that  your comments are sensible, and show 
that you understand the context.

It is the specific authors, and not "the IETF" that determines who gets 
mentioned in the "Acknowledgements" section.  In the working groups I am 
involved with, I have found the authors to be very generous with 
acknowledgements.  Sometimes I have been acknowledged when my comments 
were primarily editorial and clarification, without actually adding any 
new ideas.  Of course, there have been one or two  times that I have 
thought I made a contribution, but didn't get mentioned.  That is the 
author's choice.

As my mother used to say "What you lose on the roundabouts you gain on the 
swings"

 
IETF Remote Participants (IETFRP) SHOULD charge the IETF not the 
other way, because still the IETF ignores some IETFRP efforts (or 
even hides information that should be provided to the diverse 
community).

 
I have never felt "ignored" as a remote participant.  Sometimes 
misunderstood because there is little opportunity to expand and explain 
when you are remote.  But never ignored.

I have no idea what you mean by "hides information".  Are you suggesting 
that someone is censoring mailing list posts?

Janet
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>