I totally agree that this pointless repetition is...pointless.
Barry and I have asked folks to stop that kind of thing a number
of times with no real success. (As demonstrated by the last
few days messages.)
Perhaps this time people will be more responsible, we'll see.
I also think that the fewer people that take the bait, the
quicker these threads peter out. So each person who decides
not to hit "send" quite so readily is helping.
Stephen.
On 14/09/10 20:35, J.D. Falk wrote:
...but not for the reasons the anti-ADSP folks keep bringing up.
DKIM is failing because every discussion about actually /using/ DKIM
inevitably gets stuck in the same old argument about ADSP. Doesn't even
matter what the argument is about anymore; it stops all forward progress
every time. And we keep letting it happen -- actively participating, even,
including me.
Continuing to argue these same points over and over is disrespectful of our
colleagues both on and off this list, and of the IETF process.
So I'm going to stop, and I beg you all to join me.
Stop arguing, and start writing drafts. Let us discuss the drafts instead of
attacking each others' intractable positions for the Nth time. If you think
ADSP will bring about the end of all human communication, WRITE A DRAFT
EXPLAINING WHY. If you think something else, write that instead.
Yes, I know it requires more effort, but what we've been doing so far clearly
isn't working.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html