Re: Reminder: Poll about restructuring options

ned.freed@mrochek.com Tue, 28 September 2004 17:56 UTC

Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA07927; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 13:56:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCML1-0006Gc-Cs; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 14:04:31 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCLyk-0002Dq-HP; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 13:41:30 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCLsS-00017q-HW for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 13:35:00 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA06771 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 13:34:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: ned.freed@mrochek.com
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com ([209.55.107.55]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCM0K-0005r2-He for ietf@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 13:43:08 -0400
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01LFD7HXZSM800005R@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:34:56 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:26:58 -0700
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Tue, 28 Sep 2004 08:29:56 -0700" <p0611043abd7f31a5e80d@[10.20.30.249]>
To: Paul Hoffman / VPNC <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Message-id: <01LFEBSH63F800005R@mauve.mrochek.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
References: <2004927153921.674789@bbprime> <C4A184C3B6756B0AD785E11A@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126> <454DCF8DE6D4C10F82E806E7@scan.jck.com> <616A0E5C17EF10EF9D4736AE@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126> <41595983.7010502@cisco.com> <p0602046ebd7f170ba337@[192.168.2.2]> <p0611043abd7f31a5e80d@[10.20.30.249]>
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: e1e48a527f609d1be2bc8d8a70eb76cb
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Reminder: Poll about restructuring options
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> At 2:30 PM +0200 9/28/04, Eliot Lear wrote:

> > Just to be clear, I trust the leadership to decide better than I
> > can.  I don't know about the rest of you, but I have a day job that
> > has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with IETF governance. I'd
> > like to have the time to go over all this fun stuff, but even if I
> > did I'd rather spend it pestering some CEOs as to how they would
> > structure such organizations(s) for success.  I prefer to think of
> > myself as an engineer, not an MBA.

> Fully agree.

I agree as well.

> At 10:44 AM -0400 9/28/04, Margaret Wasserman wrote:

> > If the community refuses to participate actively in these decisions,
> > I guess that the IETF leadership will be forced to decide what to do
> > without active community input.  But, I fear that we would make a
> > poorer decision than we would with full community involvement and
> > input.

> Fully disagree.

> For one thing, many of us are not "refusing to participate actively":
> we responded to the poll saying we aren't expressing a preference.
> That is active and, in my mind, more constructive than expressing an
> opinion based on little understanding and even less commitment to
> follow through. Most of us have been in WGs where someone will have a
> strongly-held opinion based on reading the intro and TOC of a draft
> and some of the messages that have gone to the list so far; most of
> us know how much weight to give those opinions.

Paul, I agree 100% with this assessment. I personally have a slight preference
for scenario O, but it isn't strong enough to vote for it. And more to the
point, I don't believe I have enough experience to form a competent strong
opinion on this matter. And this is coming from someone who has for many years
been and continues to be actively involved in other nonprofits. I guess I know
enough to know how little I know...

				Ned

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf