Re: discussion style and respect

Alia,

That's a lot of good stuff, and I really appreciate your thoughtful
answer, and especially your rolling up your sleaves and addressing these
sorts of problems.  As I wrote, we all have a responsibility to call out
bad behavior.  Senior members of the community, ADs, IAB members and WG
chairs certainly should set an example in assisting chairs when things
get out of control.  That is- we can't place all the weight on WG chairs.

Eliot

On 6/11/15 9:44 PM, Alia Atlas wrote:

Hi Eliot,

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 3:50 AM, Eliot Lear <lear(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com
<mailto:lear(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com>> wrote:

    Hi Yoav,

    On 6/11/15 7:46 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:
    >> On Jun 11, 2015, at 12:58 AM, Michael StJohns
    <mstjohns(_at_)comcast(_dot_)net 
<mailto:mstjohns(_at_)comcast(_dot_)net>> wrote:
    >>
    >> Let me try this again.
    >>
    >> 1) Is my description of the IETF process reasonably close to
    reality?  E.g. does the consensus process contribute to
    "Standardization by Combat”?
    > Perhaps. But the best tactic for winning this kind of combat in
    the IETF is not to shout louder than others. The best tactic is to
    get a small group around you (preferably not all from the same
    company), insist on your position and refuse to budge. Then wait
    it out until your opponents grow tired and walk away.

    That's exactly what I witnessed.  I am ashamed to say that I did not
    myself say something more at the time (although I was in a very
    awkward
    position to do so).

    >
    > It is up to chairs to prevent this kind of outcome. I mean, we
    think of tenacity as a good quality but it shouldn’t override all
    others. One way is to encourage reaching consensus quickly. Long
    discussions tend to favor the tenacious.

    It's also up to us as individuals to call out bad behavior, and
    for all
    of us to recognize that just because something is said more than once
    doesn't make it any more true (or false).  And so, my challenge to the
    leadership: how shall we address this problem?  I'd like to at least
    know that the problem is recognized.

One aspect is to work on improving and discussing how to handle
consensus issues for the WG Chairs.
Anyone who hasn't read through RFC 7282 really should.  In the Routing
area, we've been having 
periodic Working Group chair training sessions.  You can see the
presentation and recording for the one
we did "On Consensus" at:
 http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/WGChairTraining .
We recently did one about "Civility in the Working Group" also to
address how to handle bad behavior.

It helps to have thought through scenarios before hand and have some
plans on how to handle it.
It can also be useful to discuss issues with those who are not
involved.  In Routing, we try to have a
safe place for WG Chairs to do so with periodic WG Chair chats.

Those of us who participate in the IETF consider some values core to
the culture which enables successful
and relevant work.  Currently, those values are partially articulated
in the Tao, but we do not stand up and
applaud those who are doing good work or illustrating those values.  
For instance, on the consensus concerns,
in today's telechat was a webrtc draft that had a very contentious and
extended effort to pick a mandatory-to-implement
codec.  As described in the write-up, Adam Roach came up with a
compromise position
(http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg13432.html)
that was able to resolve the conflict.

At the heart of the IETF, we do open, consensus-based engineering
standards.  To me, that means that we
have to be effective listeners willing to hear ideas from all
participants.  To me that means we need to consider
concerns based upon their technical and operational merit - not on how
many times or how emphatically they
are stated.   To me, that means that we develop standards that can be
usefully deployed and are aware of the
operational considerations and technical considerations that drive a
solution.

I would like to see the IETF continue to improve in being a supportive
community where there are ties of friendship and trust to help bridge
differences in technical opinion and perspective.   

Regards,
Alia

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature