Re: Keeping working groups open: Was Re: A non response ...

Marshall Rose <mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us> Fri, 07 May 1993 05:20 UTC

To: karl@empirical.com
Cc: ietf@CNRI.Reston.VA.US, snmp@uu.psi.com
Reply-To: ietf@CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Subject: Re: Keeping working groups open: Was Re: A non response ...
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 06 May 1993 12:40:29 PDT." <9305061940.AA05238@mel-brooks.empirical.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 06 May 1993 22:19:48 -0700
Message-Id: <11308.736751988@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Marshall Rose <mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us>

Karl - The current policy exists in order to focus standardization
efforts while allowing implementors to exchange information.  I have yet
to see a demonstration of a weakness in the current policy.

The only weakness is that the community continues to tolerate pointless
messages of little or no redeeming value.  Unfortunately, it is
impossible to mandate good taste or professional responsibility.  The
problem is not that people with "competent, but perhaps not completely
perfectly formed, comments" are discouraged from speaking.  The problem
is that some people who could contribute competent comments do not do
so, but instead send pointless messages to multiple mailing lists.

/mtr

Keeping working groups open: Was Re: A non respon… Karl Auerbach, Empirical Tools and Technologies, 408/427-5280
Re: Keeping working groups open: Was Re: A non re… Marshall Rose
Re: Keeping working groups open: Was Re: A non re… Richard Kooijman
Re: Keeping working groups open: Was Re: A non re… Marshall Rose
Re: Keeping working groups open: Was Re: A non re… Vince Fuller
Re: Keeping working groups open: Was Re: A non re… Marshall Rose