Re: [rtcweb] Proposed Video Selection Process

Peter Dunkley <> Thu, 21 November 2013 19:21 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABE051AE247 for <>; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:21:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bSQshh6yImew for <>; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:21:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::231]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 957571AE273 for <>; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:21:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id jt11so186816pbb.22 for <>; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:21:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google; h=references:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:cc:from:subject:date:to; bh=XXdMD+OPrHPjbT1ZM/GoqxQ/nA7qeKArEYncfKxihoE=; b=KHVzGYzUMx3qeE7yIrH4EqM/XDLh4p5vfwCj6Je+CzNdreA2M2w8LwMsnwakAiUd2i hVNFTGMa8aj+cAwGrrYcuBy4e837EiGNCzg3WH3Nrx3GwsyFZh+cpZd1c5KFhiuJtQ0C KOjo1uGm0afskEPg/IV/VWfQc3QYyLTgepgTI=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:references:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:cc:from:subject:date:to; bh=XXdMD+OPrHPjbT1ZM/GoqxQ/nA7qeKArEYncfKxihoE=; b=j/bYsipkILqK4G2uvd/4b6u3SnpIskcHnpAF1YFsLgSSptSAEBaDK537+zs5OzUEQ7 Gni7vj+0xUkl8TWE788P15X+mnjFXA/Gr4gm/ZEbPmSC6pmAFbd8pUrQjz9rVf9mllsP a44RKhX4hT9GTVQEQMPWwQ6hQuPA7VJhuDa+NeFBkn+878CehpRK+LpzjN2lLE/am48j Pt6qOsT08lfmxU28mdqXej085A/mc7ckNMZIbrNU8r08VRuu6vb7UXEpWDKVxNb2TvHH 3+ZFdtmDdOnVITFWHzCNv0z1FuiR/2+B/3dW3Xp5YWfbD+Pws6DDVbM+ibfCUZdt46Ur 2nDA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmj0ksFcV9XG/K3vjiJ+P1WPQCjkKieDoyXJF/lInhsEXRfLRA7DDv5c8ltC+Z2yRtKn1pY
X-Received: by with SMTP id kn10mr7882381pbd.106.1385061696913; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:21:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id kd1sm53992339pab.20.2013. for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:21:36 -0800 (PST)
References: <> <> <> <> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (11B554a)
From: Peter Dunkley <>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 11:21:24 -0800
To: Adam Roach <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposed Video Selection Process
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 19:21:47 -0000

Barring blue sheets signers who have not sent an email on the list as well would seem fair to me.

What I considered unfair was those that had been able to attend in person (but not really contributed) could vote when those online could not.



Peter Dunkley
Technical Director
Crocodile RCS Ltd

> On 21 Nov 2013, at 11:13, Adam Roach <> wrote:
>> On 11/21/13 10:56, Justin Uberti wrote:
>> Following an IETF meeting on Jabber doesn't count as participating?
>> The "big guy vs little guy" narrative continues...
> I think that's a bit specious. If someone is following the issue at such a distance that they haven't expressed an opinion on the mailing list, I can't see how taking a vote from them counts as anything other than simple, old-fashioned ballot stuffing.
> I'll take it one step further. I find the prospect that we're allowing blue sheets to stand in for participation to be highly questionable: letting the tourists vote is weighting the opinion of demonstrably uninvolved (or less-involved) parties at the same level as those who have actually been working on the topic. I do not think that a blue-sheet sign in without any on-list participation should be sufficient to participate in the kind of process the chairs are proposing.
> Or perhaps I'm missing something. Is there something about the capabilities of "the little guy" that makes sending an email an unrealistically high barrier to entry?
> /a
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list