Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
The link off the main page is entitled "Organizations Providing
Software, Hardware or Services". The word "Services" (at least to me)
includes consulting. So do we want to include consulting services in
this list, or make a separate list and (hopefully) adjust the title of
the first?
Mumble. Fair question but probably instead calls for changing the existing
'services' term.
The intent for that existing page is about "products". "Services" means online
services, as in service providers. I think something like "region" is a good
indication that the "consulting' entries have a basic difference.
(And in case I didn't mumble loud enough: Foo!)
Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
[Is this really appropriate for ietf-dkim?]
I couldn't decide on exactly the right venue, which is why I chose 2. The
Interop list is great, but I thought it too limited a distribution for
discussing this larger question.
On Mon, 29 Sep 2008, Dotzero wrote:
It of course also brings up the question of reputation. If we end up
listing a bunch of consultants whose work leaves something to be desired,
dkim.org won't be considered a good source of such information...
I view this as more a matter of percentages. No list is perfect. Is this list
still a good idea if 10% of the listings are for consultants who perform
poorly?
I would think so? What about 50%? 75? 90? I don't know where the cut-off
is.
Basically, my thought is to create the list, let it get populated, let it get
used, and see how useful folks feel it is. At some point, I fully expect a
sense of rough consensus, one way or the other.
Talk about eating our own dog food!
Well, it's true that this might be a dog of an idea...
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html