[tz] Request for change to the tz database

[Tim Parenti]

On Mon, 8 Feb 2021 at 16:20, John Hawkinson <jhawk at alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> > Should I ask the tz mailing list moderators (who are not me) to filter
> out
> > routine duplicate requests such as this one? At some point the duplicates
> > start to drown out the more-useful email.
>
> If we had prepared a standard boilerplate answer that explained the issues
> and our position on them effectively, I think we could consider doing that.
> But we have not done so.


In effect, we have such an answer now, and the details of that answer may
evolve over time.  So I agree we should actually start using that, as Paul
has with the most recent threads, pointing people to his proposal at:
https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2020-November/029542.html


> Saying "go search the list archives" is not very user-friendly, and I
> don't think it's a reasonable request.


I am generally inclined to agree that "search the [entire/recent] list
archives" would be ridiculous in most cases; however, as the frequency of
these requests has increased, I would note that "check that it at least
hasn't come up within the same month" is a comparatively low bar that often
isn't being cleared.

One compounding problem is that these requests go to a public list, and
then others respond with text other than the boilerplate.

On Mon, 8 Feb 2021 at 16:48, Clive D.W. Feather <clive at davros.org> wrote:

> > As it is, we're barely hitting one per month, on the average.
>
> Really? It feels a lot more.


Until recently, it was about once a month.  Lately, it's been more
frequent.  My inbox has Kiev/Kyiv threads starting on:
2020-08-15
2020-09-14
2020-11-26
2021-01-08
2021-01-18 (x2)
2021-02-05
2021-02-08

On Mon, 8 Feb 2021 at 16:55, Paul Eggert <eggert at cs.ucla.edu> wrote:

> I was thinking more along the lines of something just for this topic, as
> in, if it's another Kyiv-vs-Kiev request just reply with the
> boilerplate. The idea is to tamp down the current problem, not come up
> with a general long-purpose solution.
>

Yes, and as the proposal moves forward, we could provide the IANA
moderators with updated boilerplate as necessary.

On Mon, 8 Feb 2021 at 16:56, Russ Allbery <eagle at eyrie.org> wrote:

> It feels like intermittent, very-low-scale brigading.  There aren't any
> messages on the topic for some time, and then in the course of a week or
> so we get up to a half-dozen, all using similar wording as if they were
> all prompted by the same person or event.  (Which makes sense; clearly
> it's an issue about which people have strong passions, and that sort of
> organizing is common in the political sphere.)


#KyivNotKiev is a concerted online campaign sponsored by the Ukranian
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, so it does make sense that a lot of the
talking points in each message are similar, if not identical.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KyivNotKiev

But, yes, at some point, constant repetition doesn't add any value, and
with most of these postings, I think we've long since passed that point,
especially now that a proposed transition approach exists.  If there is
something truly new and novel to be discussed at some point, then we can
have those discussions.  But the same old back-and-forths are not
productive for anyone.

--
Tim Parenti
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/attachments/20210208/53afed98/attachment.html>