Re: [Bimi] (non)desire for bimi

[Thede Loder <[e-mail]>]

Stephen, 

>> and mua visual
>> design (while interesting) should not be really relevant to this
>> discussion imo.
> 
> I disagree here though - the proponents of bimi are arguing or
> assuming that presentation of a logo will have some positive
> effect. ISTM that means that calls for providing some convincing
> arguments about MUA visual design (which admittedly is not a
> common thing in an IETF context). I've yet to see such argument
> offered.

Can you tell me if you agree or disagree with the following statement? 

"To say that facilitating the regular practice of displaying logos (as 
sender identity) can bring about positive effects is not the same 
as saying the positive effects are due to, for example, improved 
end user-mediated choices. “ 

If you and others agree, maybe a way to move ahead is to next establish 
an agreement on possibility: 

“Is it possible that ways might exist for end users to be made safer 
without the users having to be reponsible for directly making safer 
choices for themselves? “  

If we agree such a thing might be possible (and it sounds like perhaps
you do, but are waiting for a proposal to evaluate), then we can move to 
a discussion of evaluating proposed ways.  

Thede




—
Thede Loder
Managing Director, Skye Logicworks LLC
E: [e-mail]
M: [phone]