Re: "We did not know" is not a good excuse

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Thu, 07 April 2016 16:38 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8993F12D167 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 09:38:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZqQMd71dFe-1 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 09:38:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B318E12D11D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 09:38:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.168] (76-218-10-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.10.206]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u37GbxY1008478 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 7 Apr 2016 09:37:59 -0700
Subject: Re: "We did not know" is not a good excuse
To: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
References: <09ff01d1905c$f15d4e70$d417eb50$@olddog.co.uk> <5705C39E.30807@dcrocker.net> <0a5801d19086$79f40e30$6ddc2a90$@olddog.co.uk> <570677BC.9000900@dcrocker.net> <203EFD6F-183D-4C92-9006-3BFE24BB525B@gmail.com>
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <57068CE5.1040709@dcrocker.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2016 09:37:57 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <203EFD6F-183D-4C92-9006-3BFE24BB525B@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Thu, 07 Apr 2016 09:37:59 -0700 (PDT)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/C3UWr5i4_-ZuVFh2AH0vPvUNMVE>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2016 16:38:02 -0000

On 4/7/2016 9:30 AM, Stewart Bryant wrote:
>> On 7 Apr 2016, at 16:07, Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>; wrote:
>>   And I'll suggest that this is not an issue that one should try to 'game', such as by trying to obscure the choice by floating various venue possibilities or otherwise hoping that we haven't signaled the choice to a specific city/hotel.
>
> Such a process served us well in getting feedback on members of the I* until recently.
>
> I would have thought that it would pick up problems of the type that was identified last night without compromising our commercial position too badly.


Stewart,  if you are referring to the gaming that used to be done, when 
soliciting information about nomcom candidates, by padding the list of 
names with various non-candidates, in my experience on several nomcoms, 
no it did not work well at all.

d/


-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net