Re: IESG Statement on surprised authors

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

I like this draft, but I suggest that it apply to ALL RFCs (not just the
IETF stream).

Eliot


On 5/30/15 2:02 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> I believe John is correct. Whether or not they are surprises,
> involuntary acknowledgements may be highly desirable in some
> circumstances.
>
> But wait... there's a draft about this since three minutes ago:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-whats-an-author-01
>
> Regards
>    Brian
>
> On 30/05/2015 11:25, joel jaeggli wrote:
>> Afaik from our discussion that led to this statement, and the recent
>> appeal on the subject, The contents of the acknowledges section is
>> largely at the discretion of the editors/authors.
>>
>> I liked our words on the subject at the time.
>>
>> Writing acknowledgments sections is largely a matter of editorial
>> discretion, where good sense and general attribution practices are the
>> primary guidelines, although RFC 2026 Section 10.3.1 has some specific
>> rules regarding acknowledgment of major contributors, copyright, and IPR.
>>
>>
>> On 5/29/15 4:03 PM, Jari Arkko wrote:
>>> John,
>>>
>>>> I hope this does not turn into a long discussion, but I believe
>>>> the parenthetical note about "surprised acknowledgment" either
>>>> needs to be removed 
>>> FWIW, after seeing your note I do agree that it could be misinterpreted.
>>> I’m fine with removing it. But I make no claims about the preferences
>>> of my fellow IESG members regarding such removal :-)
>>>
>>> Jari
>>>
>>
>