RE: Future Handling of Blue Sheets

["Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)" <[e-mail]>]

> I don't have an objection to this data being collected, only
> to it being made public without a good reason.

+1

Mehmet 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf
Of ext Yoav Nir
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 11:02 AM
> To: Avri Doria
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: Future Handling of Blue Sheets
> 
> 
> On Apr 24, 2012, at 11:22 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > In reading this thread several thoughts have come to mind:
> >
> > - for several years I have not been able to attend an IETF mtg in
person, yet always
> join in some of the sessions remotely. Is our remote attendance
recorded as well, or
> its it only in the chat archive?  I have noticed that not all of us
give our real names
> when we sign in (I generally do but that is beside the point.) This
would also apply to
> those who are at the physical mtg but who time share between sessions.
> 
> The handles usually map somehow to names, but only people who know
them well
> would know who "PHB", "MCR", "SM", and "fluffy" are. This also extends
to the
> minutes. You often see things like "Paul said this, Phil said that,
Yoav agreed with Paul,
> Peter said to take it to the list". Within the old boys' club of the
working group, most
> people know who these people are. Looking at the attendee list, you
can pretty much
> determine who Yoav is (there's only one), but there's plenty of Pauls,
Phils and Peters.
> 
> > - when I used to come to the physical meetings, I often noticed
people who came to
> the mtg who did not sign the blue / pink sheets. And does everyone who
comes in late
> actually find the sheet and sign it?
> 
> I would say that usually they don't sign them
> 
> > - does everyone sign their real name?  do we know if anyone has ever
signed the
> name of someone else? How often has Minnie Mouse attended an IETF WG
mtg.
> 
> I've seen at least "PHB" on a blue sheet. I also see a lot of
scribbles, that may or may
> not have been an honest attempt at writing the name legibly.
> 
> > - I thought the comment about taking pictures to record the
identities of those who
> read documents was interesting. For those who are recognizable this
its indeed a good
> record, but what about for others? Also a statement was made that no
one could
> complain about this because of the note well - but that only
references "written, audio
> and video records of meetings may be made and may be available to the
public" -
> nothing about still photography. Perhaps the video feature of the
phone should be used
> in the future.
> >
> > So it seems that the records are probably partial, and unreliable.
They are also not
> verified. Are they really useful?
> 
> They are not reliable, and they provide as much accountability as
those signatures at
> the end of emails ("the contents are confidential...") provide
confidentiality.
> 
> > In thinking about why such records are kept, I sort of understand
the various IPR
> reasons, but wonder, whether given the unreliability of the
information, it really would
> be accepted as evidence. Has ever ever been a case where these blue
sheet records
> were accepted as evidence?
> >
> > If not, are there other good reasons for the blue sheets? I mean
they are a quaint
> historical relic and that has value for any organization, but is there
a function they
> reliably serve?
> 
> I think not, but then again, I don't have an objection to this data
being collected, only
> to it being made public without a good reason. Stephan has provided an
example for
> misuse, in "for example verifying statements found in resumes". It is
not the job of
> the IETF to keep its participants honest to future employers.
> 
> Yoav