From nobody Thu Mar 17 14:15:12 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D028812D57F for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 14:15:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.109 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=opendkim.org header.b=bu5iYiHV; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=resistor.net header.b=rsiNAZVH Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 33tQamMjUIYu for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 14:15:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8363012D574 for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2016 14:15:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u2HLEr9o025007 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 17 Mar 2016 14:14:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1458249300; x=1458335700; bh=lE5tMr24losDNIl4hnd8vs28vvjVCGAOwx0ZTLmkoSU=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=bu5iYiHVEggrxgs5D78HOR/GXlS/ErVrFATI16dxhnuh6KZfORD82VSPIu0PYhe5T 47zCzf9xtyMuQky/C96ecx9pymTdMH95T6w5JiZMw6DQEfwSU6rNYspJC5W2PcTruV K4SzRwBR52F1+A9TDIPb9WqASWVJbBEvv9RWBJ8w= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1458249300; x=1458335700; i=@resistor.net; bh=lE5tMr24losDNIl4hnd8vs28vvjVCGAOwx0ZTLmkoSU=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=rsiNAZVHkaP30MKJmQPE2Sc1KeAfQ88fWz7grS1xtNwn7AaIG3aBdXK3gxoWcoo41 8YUF14xssA+YGIL1yiMnsY5Gdfqb3itO6jth+MrGETIE/UN75ZUxQ6AhtOH0MVkyt9 zNz5WJNMgenaRHVIQskbwGj8nD9x+Nj2qjdU6U8I= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20160317101512.0f39fed0@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 13:02:54 -0700 To: Michael StJohns , diversity@ietf.org From: SM In-Reply-To: <56C626D3.2040405@comcast.net> References: <99085F2E3228C28C99AB062A@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <56C267D8.5010505@gmail.com> <56C28F22.1000705@comcast.net> <20160218025414.GM66257@mx2.yitter.info> <56C556A5.8090202@comcast.net> <20160218144138.GB100@mx2.yitter.info> <56C626D3.2040405@comcast.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Diversity] IETF Culture X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 21:15:11 -0000 Hi Mike, [Following up on another mailing list to reduce ietf@ mailing list traffic] At 13:17 18-02-2016, Michael StJohns wrote: >I'm going to go off on a tangent. This is only peripherally related >to the other topic. > >One of the other things that comes up with the IETF from time to >time is how to make the IETF more open and welcoming to newcomers. >The IETF has a *lot* of unwritten rules - perhaps more than most >organizations. *IMHO*, that may make it more difficult for newcomers >to figure out how things work and where they can push or pull to >effect change - there's a lot of anecdotal evidence that this may be >the case. I would also tend to believe that written rules with >plain meanings (that are mostly followed) tend to level the playing >field for those just joining. > >(A quick google search - "written vs unwritten rules newcomers" >finds >http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/battah-workplace-rules-1.3274856 >for example - there are a lot of others in this space) > >So I'm not so sure that the above is a universal truth. Both you >and Andrew (and me FWIW) are long term participants and tend to know >where the levers are. I wonder if those just joining us would agree? A rule is defined as "one of a set of explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct or procedure within a particular area of activity" [1]. I agree that written rules with plain meanings tend to level the playing field for those who are not long term participants. A procedure would have to be explicit if it is expected that all participants understand it. This entails documenting the procedure so that any participant can learn about the rule. One of the definitions of "culture" is "the ideas, customs, and social behaviour of a particular people or society" [2]. The "unwritten rules" in what is written above could be read as: the IETF has a lot of customs. An interesting point in the link is "just because someone has been around, doesn't necessarily mean they can sort through the subtleties of [the] culture". A person who has just joined can bring in a fresh perspective. Do those customs encourage that? Are all those customs relevant today? Regards, -sm 1. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/rule 2. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/culture From nobody Sun Mar 20 06:05:18 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D339C12D760 for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2016 06:05:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4eW_eun96dKb for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2016 06:05:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qg0-x22d.google.com (mail-qg0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5ECB312D771 for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2016 06:05:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qg0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id a36so105014119qge.0 for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2016 06:05:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=lSor+uJ9QwmDtQggpvF4Xxrs82r0l3Pv96OjOpUdYe4=; b=dZ9jTNhNpjg3gOXXY/BTTwiX4K9uXjPA9cF0mboOQKwPpdKeYGwb9PIH+DFy4GFHQv OOXbqKsXlgjXkZYop0yGJZDotrVdmwp+7ks4D/OgTrFlKRNpiVGyKtECKkHbOkoEtk2c 0kPZxlidEB1d3j6152wslNHwmpztToDgbM7UvARwiGAvl8T88xCXtq/JjIj/UT/P+uVn h0bKLpySjykvqnARBPlGCxdWcK3zW5TK/BCrJE2CeEMcJ6evbyWDj8D/NCVtCPPG9nNp uI0F05OL3NwkZFHjIobGh2z/mn8ZziRC/r7ITrSdW8x+cU78OYh+HKQUuACKsqRB+Gjo rIxw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=lSor+uJ9QwmDtQggpvF4Xxrs82r0l3Pv96OjOpUdYe4=; b=UyWfctRiDs4i+5a45opBGiQJTuXNZYyqRhoF2G513y1LiJHpXYkuWKXoRw11pg7fHo Azg0sB0lC39twyAUhJrieP6Euu1r3rE75R+mDEYsf/9geRIprsuJN4IsX3UXpobDBtxx sKQ6l9v0kb2WuHYfPk2Vcqf5k9mWUYKC4TFiOPvceDkMFj0EmJlEzNu0jxZZOxNXpb1h RgiuOi2ISm4czXw2BzFXxPeLZDCjgCVKL7qXVVRqV2MRRLVFaZBEuQwmU3DUtwsmLGzK iMVi7bGySONzFPum5Y8grTQn7sJSMegin6QO3ZN6GqKWZ+4nM4NX6LYdk6FQkkK16kTp 5rxQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJKuRcIztHYw450MgGUxsp6fhE2473hIyw7NbufRH+Zz+SIm8Zaj1DVccYUexMUjPnJ77hmuG+HsrlrnMg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.35.115 with SMTP id m106mr33736074qgm.13.1458479114348; Sun, 20 Mar 2016 06:05:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.18.193 with HTTP; Sun, 20 Mar 2016 06:05:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20160317101512.0f39fed0@resistor.net> References: <99085F2E3228C28C99AB062A@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <56C267D8.5010505@gmail.com> <56C28F22.1000705@comcast.net> <20160218025414.GM66257@mx2.yitter.info> <56C556A5.8090202@comcast.net> <20160218144138.GB100@mx2.yitter.info> <56C626D3.2040405@comcast.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20160317101512.0f39fed0@resistor.net> Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2016 15:05:14 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: SM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c038e085f1a7052e7aa1b5 Archived-At: Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] IETF Culture X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2016 13:05:18 -0000 --001a11c038e085f1a7052e7aa1b5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I think it is good that we look into unwritten rules, or defining the IETF culture, or looking into what needs to change in the IETF culture, or what a newcomer needs to know about the IETF culture. When I first participated in IETF I seen good things and bad things and that is normal in any organisation, but the great thing in IETF is that it has some very nice people to know and work with (any organisation needs more nice and cooperative people). Any organisation has a culture and no doubt that it is changing by time or by people, but rules and managers both help to guide the directions to success or failure. Heads or Chairmans need to define and audit the organisation culture and the direction of its changes. I think the IETF general area is responsible to get a group to work on these issues or unwritten views. The importance of planning for newcomers welcomed and involved into the IETF, reminds me of countries that plan (work hard with groups) to get new immigrants that make the country more powerful/intellegent/success. So the question is, Do we have in IETF a progress plan for better culture or for newcomers? maybe ietf has unwritten plans or unwritten rules that complicate the culture-change or new-perspectives. AB On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:02 PM, SM wrote: > Hi Mike, > > [Following up on another mailing list to reduce ietf@ mailing list > traffic] > > At 13:17 18-02-2016, Michael StJohns wrote: > >> I'm going to go off on a tangent. This is only peripherally related to >> the other topic. >> >> One of the other things that comes up with the IETF from time to time is >> how to make the IETF more open and welcoming to newcomers. The IETF has a >> *lot* of unwritten rules - perhaps more than most organizations. *IMHO*, >> that may make it more difficult for newcomers to figure out how things work >> and where they can push or pull to effect change - there's a lot of >> anecdotal evidence that this may be the case. I would also tend to believe >> that written rules with plain meanings (that are mostly followed) tend to >> level the playing field for those just joining. >> >> (A quick google search - "written vs unwritten rules newcomers" finds >> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/battah-workplace-rules-1.3274856 >> for example - there are a lot of others in this space) >> >> So I'm not so sure that the above is a universal truth. Both you and >> Andrew (and me FWIW) are long term participants and tend to know where the >> levers are. I wonder if those just joining us would agree? >> > > A rule is defined as "one of a set of explicit or understood regulations > or principles governing conduct or procedure within a particular area of > activity" [1]. I agree that written rules with plain meanings tend to > level the playing field for those who are not long term participants. A > procedure would have to be explicit if it is expected that all participants > understand it. This entails documenting the procedure so that any > participant can learn about the rule. > > One of the definitions of "culture" is "the ideas, customs, and social > behaviour of a particular people or society" [2]. The "unwritten rules" > in what is written above could be read as: the IETF has a lot of customs. > An interesting point in the link is "just because someone has been around, > doesn't necessarily mean they can sort through the subtleties of [the] > culture". > > A person who has just joined can bring in a fresh perspective. Do those > customs encourage that? Are all those customs relevant today? > > Regards, > -sm > > 1. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/rule > 2. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/culture > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > --001a11c038e085f1a7052e7aa1b5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I think it is good that we look into unwritten r= ules, or defining the IETF culture, or looking into what needs to change in= the IETF culture, or what a newcomer needs to know about the IETF culture.= When I first participated in IETF I seen good things and bad things and th= at is normal in any organisation, but the great thing in IETF is that it ha= s some very nice people to know and work with (any organisation needs more = nice and cooperative people). Any organisation has a culture and no doubt t= hat it is changing by time or by people, but rules and managers both help t= o guide the directions to success or failure. Heads or Chairmans need to de= fine and audit the organisation culture and the direction of its changes.
I think the IETF general area is responsible to get a group to = work on these issues or unwritten views. The importance of planning for new= comers welcomed and involved into the IETF, reminds me of countries that pl= an (work hard with groups) to get new immigrants that make the country more= powerful/intellegent/success. So the question is, Do we have in IETF a pro= gress plan for better culture or for newcomers? maybe ietf has unwritten pl= ans or unwritten rules that complicate the culture-change or new-perspectiv= es.

AB

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:02 PM, SM <sm@resistor.net> wrote:
Hi Mike,

[Following up on another mailing list to reduce ietf@ mailing list traffic]=

At 13:17 18-02-2016, Michael StJohns wrote:
I'm going to go off on a tangent.=C2=A0 This is only peripherally relat= ed to the other topic.

One of the other things that comes up with the IETF from time to time is ho= w to make the IETF more open and welcoming to newcomers. The IETF has a *lo= t* of unwritten rules - perhaps more than most organizations. *IMHO*, that = may make it more difficult for newcomers to figure out how things work and = where they can push or pull to effect change - there's a lot of anecdot= al evidence that this may be the case.=C2=A0 I would also tend to believe t= hat written rules with plain meanings (that are mostly followed) tend to le= vel the playing field for those just joining.

(A quick google search - "written vs unwritten rules newcomers" f= inds http://www.cbc.ca/n= ews/canada/new-brunswick/battah-workplace-rules-1.3274856 for example -= there are a lot of others in this space)

So I'm not so sure that the above is a universal truth.=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Bo= th you and Andrew (and me FWIW) are long term participants and tend to know= where the levers are.=C2=A0 I wonder if those just joining us would agree?=

A rule is defined as "one of a set of explicit or understood regulatio= ns or principles governing conduct or procedure within a particular area of= activity" [1].=C2=A0 I agree that written rules with plain meanings t= end to level the playing field for those who are not long term participants= .=C2=A0 A procedure would have to be explicit if it is expected that all pa= rticipants understand it.=C2=A0 This entails documenting the procedure so t= hat any participant can learn about the rule.

One of the definitions of "culture" is "the ideas, customs, = and social behaviour of a particular people or society" [2].=C2=A0 The= =C2=A0 "unwritten rules" in what is written above could be read a= s: the IETF has a lot of customs.=C2=A0 An interesting point in the link is= "just because someone has been around, doesn't necessarily mean t= hey can sort through the subtleties of [the] culture".

A person who has just joined can bring in a fresh perspective.=C2=A0 Do tho= se customs encourage that?=C2=A0 Are all those customs relevant today?

Regards,
-sm

1. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defini= tion/english/rule
2. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/def= inition/english/culture
_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity

--001a11c038e085f1a7052e7aa1b5-- From nobody Sun Mar 20 23:20:57 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFF2512D675 for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2016 23:20:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.109 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=opendkim.org header.b=lKs5y30b; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=resistor.net header.b=y8QDgwD4 Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6UIyHN8Fn2Hh for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2016 23:20:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D72E112D603 for ; Sun, 20 Mar 2016 23:20:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u2L6KXlf020183 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 20 Mar 2016 23:20:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1458541239; x=1458627639; bh=LQgViNJpCGwKHrkoPpkEkHkD3mpVaWuAbBELPKAOn3w=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=lKs5y30bDlqYkHax+JbwFwJdkI59k1nYyWYMoPN5QCJBWxPXhOTdsnwWzexr/IeJE cZF9gqwuA4IJpzgVAN+vnQZIHRT3RVLyUNNqGtjFtIODLRTfXp8QoAJEtqE/QY6tW7 /SjwVIMCbc95he+wLV4jF8nXaShzx5GpCrjK40E8= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1458541239; x=1458627639; i=@resistor.net; bh=LQgViNJpCGwKHrkoPpkEkHkD3mpVaWuAbBELPKAOn3w=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=y8QDgwD45BP1pjSF4eD3JPCnYBF0cjqJ5wqt1+TWsXhoLkOiZxnxkRmWzEtsDAmHG ifjiLHebmqHssYbx3VQEohB1uFl1iY/zmLQ4uFs1LRJYUEHYHRvZfzx7yvhQ8bQk5w OBb8HfFEoPMtQohtpfZILFkHY6I08XQDM1/barsA= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20160320214738.06dcebb0@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2016 22:58:51 -0700 To: Abdussalam Baryun , diversity@ietf.org From: SM In-Reply-To: References: <99085F2E3228C28C99AB062A@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <56C267D8.5010505@gmail.com> <56C28F22.1000705@comcast.net> <20160218025414.GM66257@mx2.yitter.info> <56C556A5.8090202@comcast.net> <20160218144138.GB100@mx2.yitter.info> <56C626D3.2040405@comcast.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20160317101512.0f39fed0@resistor.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Diversity] IETF Culture X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 06:20:57 -0000 Hi Abdussalam, At 06:05 20-03-2016, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >I think the IETF general area is responsible to get a group to work >on these issues or unwritten views. The importance of planning for >newcomers welcomed and involved into the IETF, reminds me of >countries that plan (work hard with groups) to get new immigrants >that make the country more powerful/intellegent/success. So the >question is, Do we have in IETF a progress plan for better culture >or for newcomers? maybe ietf has unwritten plans or unwritten rules >that complicate the culture-change or new-perspectives. There will be a presentation about "unwritten rules" in Buenos Aires. The group responsible for working on those issues is the EDU team ( https://www.ietf.org/edu/ ). The unwritten rule nowadays is not to say anything which might cause offence. A person who is not a newcomer will understand what is not being said. A person who is not a newcomer but who is inexperienced will not understand what is not being said. Regards, -sm