On 08/19/2010 10:23 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
On 19/08/10 18:06, Michael Thomas wrote:
On 08/19/2010 09:20 AM, John Levine wrote:
Be sure to tell them that ADSP is not useful, according to one of the
authors of the ADSP RFC.
Chairs --
Can I ask for a revision of ADSP where John is stripped out of the document?
You can ask. The answer is that we don't currently have
a revision of ASDP on our charter and RFCs do not change.
It's ridiculous that he presumes to speak for it,
John was an editor of ADSP, which is a WG product. I think its a fine
thing to do editing work even if you don't agree with the content.
Well, I don't. Would you hire somebody to build a bridge that they
think would be fine and dandy if it collapsed?
I personally wouldn't then deride the WG output, but the RFC is what
gets read, so I treat remarks like John's as the background noise that
they are, but I do understand why some WG participants find it annoying.
That's because you have scruples.
and it was a huge mistake
to give him this undue credibility. Especially when he has none.
That last is out of order on a list such as this. Please desist.
I'd say I'm sorry, but I'm not. You guys made a huge mistake, and
John's continuing baseless jihad is a disservice to the community.
Mike
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html