Re: Procedures for Moving Forward
"D. J. Bernstein" <djb@cr.yp.to> Thu, 27 July 2000 23:18 UTC
Received: from cs.utk.edu (CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA01106 for <drums-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:18:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id TAA22264; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:18:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by cs.utk.edu (bulk_mailer v1.13); Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:18:08 -0400
Received: by cs.utk.edu (cf v2.9s-UTK) id TAA22242; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:18:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from muncher.math.uic.edu (marvin@localhost) by cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id TAA22209; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:18:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from muncher.math.uic.edu (131.193.178.181 -> koobera.math.uic.edu) by cs.utk.edu (smtpshim v1.0); Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:18:06 -0400
Received: (qmail 17115 invoked by uid 1001); 27 Jul 2000 23:18:28 -0000
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:18:28 -0000
Message-ID: <20000727231828.21319.qmail@cr.yp.to>
From: "D. J. Bernstein" <djb@cr.yp.to>
To: drums@cs.utk.edu
Subject: Re: Procedures for Moving Forward
References: <3884949.3173621722@nifty-jr.west.sun.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:drums-request@cs.utk.edu?Subject=unsubscribe>
There are many problems with Newman's procedures. For example:
* Newman condones unauthorized changes by the document editor.
* Newman fails to recognize previously stated objections and previous
suggestions of revisions to the text. Those of us who disagree with
the document editor have been forced to speak up again and again
and again.
* Newman prohibits messages discussing more than one issue. There's
no harm in trying---I tried this after smtpupd-09---but sometimes
two issues really should be discussed together.
* Newman has a ridiculously broad prohibition on messages ``that
could be construed as impolite.'' This is selectively enforced
against messages whose content Newman doesn't like.
* Newman prohibits everything other than objections to smtpupd. In
particular, procedural objections such as this one aren't allowed.
We'd be done a hell of a lot faster if we simply settled the issues,
rather than spending all this time on bogus meta-discussions.
---Dan
- Procedures for Moving Forward DRUMS WG Chair
- Re: Procedures for Moving Forward DRUMS WG Chair
- Conflict between X.1.9(iv) and literal interpreta… Bart Schaefer
- Re: Conflict between X.1.9(iv) and literal interp… Keith Moore
- Re: Procedures for Moving Forward D. J. Bernstein