RE: Rude responses

[<[e-mail]>]

> I experienced rude respondings in IETF list

That would be when you tried to get April 1 RFCs discontinued.

> in  one WG list

That would be MANET, when you lobbied for an acknowledgement on a draft you didn't write or contribute significantly to.

Have you considered that being polite and reasonable on organisation business means both not making unreasonable requests, and first making an effort to understand the organisation whose business you are attempting to conduct? Your requests come from a clear lack of understanding of the IETF or how it works.

Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood/


________________________________________
From: [e-mail] [[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Abdussalam Baryun [[e-mail]]
Sent: 25 August 2013 12:27
To: Pete Resnick
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email,         Version 1) to Proposed Standard)

I experienced rude respondings in IETF list and in  one WG list, I don't beleive that it is culture of IETF participants, but it seems that some people should understand to be polite and reasonable in such organisation business. Finally, the rude responding is not controled by the chair of thoes lists, therefore, thoes lists can be rude lists from time to time.

AB