My guess is "need more patience grasshopper".
I didn't respond to your post because I haven't read your draft yet
(light reading for the weekend?) although it is on my to-do list. I've
read your posts on other lists and you seem a reasonable person so I
do plan on taking the time to read the draft.
Some of us have day jobs that have to take a priority to reading and responding.
Lastly, the level of discussion on ASRG hasn't gotten me overly
excited overall in quite some time so I don't always pay as close
attention to the flow of posts as I might on some other lists.
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Alessandro Vesely<vesely(_at_)tana(_dot_)it>
wrote:
I've only been subscribed to this list for 18 months, so you will forgive me
if I haven't yet grasped how it works. I've been receiving spam for much
longer than that, and lazily waited for someone to reel off the rules to
kill that plague. It never happened. Why? When I subscribed, I thought I'd
at least understand that...
Understanding this list's dynamics is not easier. As in many lists, messages
that start a new thread are relatively rare. I don't have message-per-thread
statistics, but usually there are many responses. Some messages get no
response; for example, Frank sent a message on Spam Statistics on April 28,
and nobody answered, AFAIK.
In particular, I'm puzzled as to why I got no answer to my yesterday's
message. A previous message by Amir, DNS-based Email Sender Authentication
Mechanisms: a Critical Review, had several responses. The subject of my I-D
is almost the same, an SMTP extension to manage those authentication
mechanisms. However, I had exactly zero response. The same happened for a
similar message I sent on May 25. I cannot believe it is by chance. Since it
happened twice in a row, there has to be a sound reason.
Possible guesses:
* Because nobody is interested in the subject.
Already ruled out: it is the same subject of Amir's paper (rDNS, SPF, DKIM,
and the like.) How come nobody is interested?
* Because nobody has the time to retrieve the I-D from the web.
Doesn't work, by the same argument nobody would have read Amir's paper.
* Because it is poorly written.
Well, my English is not that good, but used to be readable. Also, at first I
thought an I-D's introduction should only give a hint at interpreting the
behavior described in the rest of the text, in order to let readers draw the
consequences more freely. Now I've changed it to describe the use model. I
admit that's confusing, but not to the point of not discussing it: in facts,
I've discussed it with a handful of people already, but never on a list.
Hm... _that_'s puzzling.
* Because it is written by me.
Naah... paranoid.
* Because nobody is interested in yet another anti-spam tool.
I could understand that. But this does not explain why everyone resisted to
the temptation of telling me why I'm an asshole.
* Because someone wrote privately to everyone banning public answers.
Unbelievable, paranoid, I don't think would ever have worked as intended.
* Because vhlo is not endorsed by John.
Not really. John himself told me to write to the list. Possibly, he did not
answer because he wanted to see if anybody _else_ was interested.
* Because it is not endorsed by the IESG.
Uh? What is the IESG?
* Because the referred paper is an I-D.
Hmm... this list has been discussing I-Ds before. However, it may be that a
public message about an I-D would have be classified as rough dissension and
thereby commit the IETF to do something with it, such as assigning it a
"dead" state. I'm not much into the standardization process, but such a rule
would seem too bureaucratically silly to be operative.
Yet, it happens every time. I bet I can reproduce that behavior
consistently, look at this: "Hey, I've written take 3". See any response?
No. So, why?
FWIW, and for your convenience, I paste below the original text that
inspired the title of this rant.
Hello darkness my old friend,
I've come to talk with you again
Because a vision softly creeping
left it's seeds while I was sleeping
And the vision that was planted in my brain
still remains, within the sounds of silence
In restless dreams I walked alone,
narrow streets of cobblestone
'neath the halo of a streetlamp
I turned my collar to the cold and damp
when my eyes were stabbed by the flash of a neon light
split the night... and touched the sound of silence
And in the naked light I saw
ten thousand people maybe more
people talking without speaking
people hearing without listening
people writing songs that voices never share
noone dare, disturb the sound of silence
Fools said I you do not know,
silence like a cancer grows,
hear my words that I might teach you
take my arms that I might reach you
but my words, like silent raindrops fell...
and echoed the will of silence
And the people bowed and prayed,
to the neon god they made
And the sign flashed out its warning
in the words that it was forming
And the sign said, "The words of the prophets
are written on the subway walls, and tenement halls
and whisper the sounds of silence.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg