Subject: RE: I-D tracker automatic reminders

From: Eastlake III Donald-LDE008 <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2004 10:50:23 -0400

~exponential backoff?

Donald

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Pekka Savola
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2004 1:45 AM
To: Bill Fenner
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: I-D tracker automatic reminders

On Mon, 5 Apr 2004, Bill Fenner wrote:
> My concern is that automatic reminders could increase friction for
> problematic documents.  A chair that is frustrated by an unresponsive
> document editor is not going to be helped by getting a reminder every 2
> weeks that the update is still pending.  Perhaps I'm not looking at it
> the right way, but I expect that unless we deploy an incredibly flexible
> (and complex) system, the frustration at unwanted reminders will be
> greater than the benefit of useful ones.

I can certainly see this, having been in this specific situation.

The message needs appropriate tune. 

Not:

 "Why aren't these documents progressing?!!? It's your responsibility 
  to make sure they move along!!!"

But rather for example:

 "Could you try prodding the appropriate parties to make sure the 
  revisions are in progress.  Thanks!"

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

---

From: Rob Austein <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2004 14:14:13 -0400

>  ~exponential backoff?

capped.