Re: IETF privacy policy - update

[Larry Smith <[e-mail]>]

On Thu July 8 2010 15:24, Fred Baker wrote:
> On Jul 8, 2010, at 1:18 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
> > On Jul 8, 2010, at 12:08 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
> >> Boy, would they dispute that. ITU has claimed that the IETF is not an
> >> open organization because a government cannot join it. Most membership
> >> organizations, RIPE, being an example, have a definition of how someone
> >> can become a member (members of RIPE are companies and pay a fee), and
> >> are considered open to that class of membership.
> >
> > But the IETF isn't a membership organization - isn't that
> > at least in part what's meant by "open," and why at least in
> > part we don't have voting (in theory)?
>
> We don't have voting because we don't have members, yes. Definitions of
> "open" vary, and boil down to a statement of what kind of actor an
> organization is open to. IETF is open to individuals.
>

Appears to me this conversation/thread is leaning toward "open" being
used synonymous to "anonymous"....

-- 
Larry Smith
[e-mail]