To make it short. I disagree. I’m not asking to change the way IETF procedures
work or anything similar.
I think we need to be in the “market” and that means that many operators (or
other communities) that don’t have the time or the resources, or just they
aren’t willing to subscribe to a mailing list, keep informed of our
announcements, in an automated way, by means of as many social networks we can.
Just informative, not as part of the “contribution” process, not replacing
actual mail exploders, etc.
Regards,
Jordi
-----Mensaje original-----
De: ietf <ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org> en nombre de John C Klensin
<john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com>
Responder a: <john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com>
Fecha: lunes, 17 de julio de 2017, 23:09
Para: <jordi(_dot_)palet(_at_)consulintel(_dot_)es>
CC: IETF <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Asunto: Re: Revamp of the www.ietf.org website
Jordi,
Three observations.
* Noting that assorted social media are, from time to time, more
or less effectively blocked in assorted countries, I think we
need to be sure that all IETF participants are able to get to
all IETF announcements and materials on an equal basis unless
the IETF itself is blocked. If someone wants to reflect IETF
announcements into some social media or supplemental mailing
list, that is fine and has been going on for years, but
substantive announcements and discussions need to stay on IETF
mailing lists and be archived on IETF facilities or we end up
with big openness and transparency problems.
* Precisely because the IETF has some very large vendors among
its supporters, our being able to continue to claim that we are
not biased toward those vendors and that our standards decisions
are not for sale, we need to be careful about not forcing people
to contribute to the bottom line of those companies in order to
participate. We've been reasonably careful (much more careful
than some other SDOs) to not require someone to purchase some
particular work processing package or office suite to
participate. I suggest that, if the IETF is going to get tied
up with Social Media, the system(s) used must be ones that do
not have business models involving "user as product", targeted
advertising to users, permission to spam users, or requirements
that users give up significant privacy in order to join, get
feeds. or equ9ivalent. Again, if someone wants to re-{post,
chirp, tweet, vomit, etc.} materials from an IETF mailing list,
I think we have always allowed thet. However, IMO, the IETF
needs to be really careful about getting more directly involved.
* I share Martin's concern about page size, complexity, and load
times, especially if we are serious about trying to involve
people in developing countries and otherwise with with marginal
connections.
best,
john
--On Monday, July 17, 2017 21:35 +0200 JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
<jordi(_dot_)palet(_at_)consulintel(_dot_)es> wrote:
> I disagree on this.
>
> Having our announcements for last calls, RFC, STDs, major
> events, etc., in social media, helps to disseminate IETF
> activities, and we like or not social networks (I'm
> personally not a fan of them), is an obligation today. Many
> folks will not use a mailing list to know about "new" IETF
> work, but they will happily subscribe to a facebook or tweeter
> account.
>
> Regards,
> Jordi
>
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: ietf <ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org> en nombre de Martin Rex
> <mrex(_at_)sap(_dot_)com> Responder a: <mrex(_at_)sap(_dot_)com>
> Fecha: lunes, 17 de julio de 2017, 17:32
> Para: <jordi(_dot_)palet(_at_)consulintel(_dot_)es>
> CC: IETF <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
> Asunto: Re: Revamp of the www.ietf.org website
>
> JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
> >
> > I think a missing aspect of the web site, which should
> be prominent in > both the home page and also the
> ?contact? page, is all the social media. >
> > I see there is a ?share this page? at the right of the
> main picture, > but in my opinion, is not clearly visible
> and is not enough > (the logos of the social networks
> should be recognized without...
> Cough, cough, WHAT???
>
> Please get rid of the "social media" crap entirely. I
> thought that there was an IETF consensus that privcay is
> sensible and useful, and strong privacy protections should
> be the default.
>
> Facebook, Twitter and other "social media" crap is the far
> opposite of strongy privacy, so none of this should be
> encouraged or promoted by the IETF.
>
>
>
> Comparing the bandwidth necessary to load the entire
> homepage, I notice the following issues:
>
> https://www.ietf.org/ Total 188176 bytes (mainly by
> accident, it seems) The visible
> page _contents_ are just fine,
> but the page designer goofed the photo in the meeting
> information, because the picture is transferred at
> size 640x427 taking up 150270 bytes, although it is
> actually being displayed at just 200x133, where a
> pre-scaled image would need just 17 KBytes.
>
> Even on my 5" Smartphone, the https://www.ietf.org/
> loads just fine, I get the whole picture immediately,
> and can zoon into my area of interest.
>
> http://www.ietf.org/ Total 1195800 bytes (ouch ouch
> ouch ouch).
> is a completely botched page design. it needs
> multi-page scrolldown even on a big desktop screen,
> and finding stuff has become extremely difficult.
>
> This page even manages to provide *ZERO* intelligible
> information when loaded on my SmartPhone
>
> only shows the Welcome / Revamp <Learn More> + Social
> Media Crap Buttons
> and when scrolling down the multiple pages of crap on
> my SmartPhone, very close to zero of the links
> _that_used_to_be_ on https://www.ietf.org pass by.
>
>
> Normally I close such bloated ad & nag screens
> immediately, though nowadays uBlock saves my health by
> ensuring that most of such crap does not even get
> displayed on any of my screens (desktop & mobile) in
> the first place.
>
> The huge background picture
> (IETF-Past-Meetings.max-4000x4000.jpg) with 763216
> Bytes is just crazy. Is this about a party/festival?
> A *HUGE* waste of network bandwidth and memory (RAM and
> on-disk cache) and writing text over photos also make
> reading difficult (poor contrast).
>
>
> All in all, my personal summary for https://beta.ietf.org/
>
> disgusting and extremly bloated, usless and highly
> confusing.
>
> -Martin
>
>
>
>
>
>
> **********************************************
> IPv4 is over
> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> http://www.consulintel.es
> The IPv6 Company
>
> This electronic message contains information which may be
> privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be
> for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not
> the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying,
> distribution or use of the contents of this information,
> including attached files, is prohibited.
>
>
>
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that
any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, including attached files, is prohibited.