Re: [apps-discuss] Revised DMARC working group charter proposal

[Scott Kitterman <[e-mail]>]

On Thursday, April 18, 2013 09:12:19 AM Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 4/16/2013 6:23 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On Tuesday, April 16, 2013 08:37:10 AM Dave Crocker wrote:
> >> On 4/15/2013 8:58 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >>> 1.  How about this?
> >>> 2.  Not quite, here are some alternatives we could discuss.
> >>> 1.  I quit.
> >>> 
> >>> that's hardly a negotiation.
> >> 
> >> 1. The exchange was more elaborate than that,
> 
> ...
> 
> >> 2. The lockout imagine is striking and entirely inapplicable, since
> >> there is no pre-existing relationship, nevermind an employer/employee
> >> one.
> > 
> > Right.  It's an analogy and like all analogy is imperfect.
> 
> Scott,
> 
> An analogy is supposed to demonstrate core properties that match the
> 
> situation.  Similarly:
> > Also imperfect, but perhaps less orthogonal might be the analogy of the
> > kid
> > that shows up at the playground with a cool new toy and stomps off and
> > goes
> > home when the other kids won't play with the toy precisely according to
> > his
> > rules.
> 
> entirely misses the point of what is currently happening.
> 
> 
> The current exchange has had more of the flavor of:
> 
>     A:    How about X.
>     B&C:  That's unacceptable, so do alternatives Y or Z.
>     A:    Here are the reasons those alternatives don't match the
>           current situation and here are the distinctive characteristics
>           of the current situation.
>     B&C:  Do Y or Z
>     {rinse repeat}
>     A:    OK, how about A.
>     B&C:  Do Y or Z
> 
> After some iterations in this model, it become clear that the
> negotiation isn't a negotiation.
> 
> Until you and Stephen engage in discussing the substance of the
> responses you've been getting, there isn't a meaningful discussion
> happening.

OK.  It seemed to me that in your analogy is was more like A saying "How about 
X" over and over.

Since you are a part of the DMARC development community, do you have a sense 
of if that group is willing to support a working group charter that allows for 
technical changes to be made in the protocol in the event significant technical 
issues are discovered?

Scott K