Re: [IAOC] Feedback Requested on Draft Fees Policy

David Morris <dwm@xpasc.com> Sun, 22 July 2012 21:00 UTC

Return-Path: <dwm@xpasc.com>
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 014FE21F8587 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 14:00:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.985
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.985 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-3.386, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OyPYRRBBEWqw for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 14:00:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from c2w3p-2.abacamail.com (c2w3p-2.abacamail.com [209.133.53.32]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E2D621F854B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 14:00:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xpasc.com (unknown [68.164.244.188]) by c2w3p-2.abacamail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0E8F40A22 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 21:01:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from egate.xpasc.com (egate.xpasc.com [10.1.2.49]) by xpasc.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q6ML1h7X005100 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 22 Jul 2012 14:01:43 -0700
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 14:01:43 -0700
From: David Morris <dwm@xpasc.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [IAOC] Feedback Requested on Draft Fees Policy
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1207221654200.31418@joyce.lan>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.01.1207221359180.5034@egate.xpasc.com>
References: <CAJNg7VKqbdXeFXCe6iBRPe=X89q4NuSVcgvmc+C=t0826HRwiA@mail.gmail.com> <20120722153118.60473.qmail@joyce.lan> <CAJNg7VK9OJNdtBb4+F3ZepvgpwuXQ_30ung_Y91m--g1a+CpfA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1207221550590.17748@joyce.lan> <06CAE00A-F7AF-4D6C-ACE4-0D8399C13F44@sobco.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1207221642080.31418@joyce.lan> <3B377A30-123B-4772-AAB8-FAA535FDD0BE@sobco.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1207221654200.31418@joyce.lan>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.01 (LRH 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
X-AV-Type: clean
X-AV-Accuracy: exact
X-Milter-Version: master.52-geef5514
X-CLX-ID: a120AD3GD1et1vr-6M1401i
X-CLX-Spam: false
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 21:00:42 -0000

Yeah, with what the lawyers in the room are getting per hour, there is no
reason to volunteer as an expert wittness. Ever. Even if you are there
on behalf of the IETF, if the IETF prevails, they can only recover costs
they incurred and if they don't, make a donation. 

On Sun, 22 Jul 2012, John R Levine wrote:

> > I did not do them any favor - I did the IETF a favor (as the then ISOC VP
> > for Standards)
> 
> Really, if you didn't make the opposing party pay for your time, you did them
> a favor. It's absolutely expected to pay hostile witnesses for their depo
> time. (If nobody mentioned it, why would they offer to pay if you were willing
> to do it for free?)
> 
> If it happens again, pick the highest rate you think you're worth and double
> it.  If you want, donate the money to the IETF trust and encourage them to use
> it for better cookies.
> 
> R's,
> John
>