Re: [apps-discuss] Call for Adoption: draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Sat, 12 May 2012 13:25 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54EF921F861F for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 May 2012 06:25:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.969
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.969 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.008, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jlc-pltcfY85 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 May 2012 06:25:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-f172.google.com (mail-lb0-f172.google.com [209.85.217.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35E6321F861D for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 May 2012 06:25:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lbbgo11 with SMTP id go11so2805168lbb.31 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 May 2012 06:25:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=g7NpRSj14HUZnlURteKSD7nimvYAklyOIMNWHpksuLQ=; b=DAEOhDnWfSmJdyyXwWk6qt5euWTvb4Yl2WvpusCg7ILaKOeQ7tToscdT1OFlfA4Wnb rFErRZbnkoUFUAgXYmO4DLl8FtXMWShvRIeCqpFvLgeXVMNW7XXN7kXCbGVJLhsHwfIH tcAn7n2Wysd1lp2xbyBnH8INE4W5jmToi0UGCR2j690i2xhYDE2L8QI5ENVCzEj62xYB mrgejX39VCRr5OIMG2ohhNQX/dMsBN1ZUTmcN3Undihztccnk8GNBQh1nRMlx2iZb9Th fb0QA4b2C+fhYMdZSZspRtdGXl381XiUMbLSsMaLKs8RrkS5XkKpkexgV9/LYeX972Bw fqvA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.112.101.105 with SMTP id ff9mr758334lbb.44.1336829148045; Sat, 12 May 2012 06:25:48 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com
Received: by 10.112.7.7 with HTTP; Sat, 12 May 2012 06:25:47 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20120511165259.09522610@resistor.net>
References: <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E00392811ECBB@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20120511165259.09522610@resistor.net>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 09:25:47 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 43gzEKsl2GNwcF-VFY5fAzOz5Jw
Message-ID: <CAC4RtVAphPhn4HpCkn6=bYcpjV7OPRmx3zMNLiTkffSWjhLgGQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Call for Adoption: draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 13:25:51 -0000

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 8:53 PM, SM <sm@resistor.net> wrote:
> During the discussions about the formation of this working group, it was
> mentioned that it should not be the dumping ground for everything
> Apps-related.  As the final decision rests with the Apps ADs, I'll stay out
> of this.

On "I'll stay out of this," I'll note that you already haven't.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/paralipsis

This AD thinks there's a difference between a "dumping ground for
everything Apps-related" and a "home for otherwise homeless
Apps-related work."  The former implies that everything ends up here
without real thought or filtering.

I think AppsAWG is a good way to get attention paid to work that the
Apps community has thought about and decided is worth doing.  Thought
and filtering are critical to that, and that's what's happening in
this thread.

Carry on.

Barry