On Thursday 06 December 2007 12:17, Steve Atkins wrote:
... but this working group has people who are prepared to spend
a lot of time to shout down those they disagree with, leading to an
unproductive and unprofessional environment. I find the lack of
courtesy and professionalism here unpleasant enough that I tend
not to get involved much, even though I see very poor design
decisions being made.
I'm sympathetic to this perspective. I think we have two broad groups here.
One believes that SSP has utility and one believes that it doesn't. Trying
to produce a design by committee that attempts to split the difference is
suboptimal.
Personally, I'm getting sick of the attacks on the concept and utility of SSP
at this point in the game. I really wish people would focus on making it as
good as it can be and then we'll see what we end up with.
I'm having a hard time not believing that some people are intentionally trying
to undermine SSP development.
I agree that some poor design decisions are getting made and have less
interest than I used to in trying to invest my time in fixing it (and no, I'm
not going to expend the time to go into details).
Scott K
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html