RE: IESG Statement on surprised authors

["Tony Hain" <[e-mail]>]

John Levine wrote:

> >> So  there is an opportunity for a surprise author to alert the IESG &
> >> RFC editor.
> >Yes, there is a chance to publicly humiliate the submitter. I would not want
> to do that, so your proposed solution doesn't address my need.
> 
> Considering that most of these situations appear to be mistakes, why
> should correcting this mistake be more humiliating than correcting the
> zillions of other mistakes fixed from one version of an I-D to the next?
> 
> R's,
> John
> 
> PS: If it's not clear, this is a real question.
> 

The other real question is why this has to be public at all? So you name appears on -0n and not on -0n+1, the only people that need to know why are the "surprised" and the submitter. If the submitter refuses to take it off, alerting the IESG and RFC-editor (still not a public humiliation) should be enough. The only case where one might  consider "going public" is if an I-D is in last call and you still can't get the acknowledgment removed. If the IESG has decided against you already though, it is likely there is a reason you should not be dropped from the contributors list, so public complaining is likely to be more humiliating for the complainer. 

Tony