Agreed. And why, in some cases, it is of dubious value to ask WG chairs
or ADs to act in the mentoring process. Unless of course the intent is
to drive people away. Even if, as Randy Bush suggests, the idea as
presented,
was ill-conceived, and was being encouraged by a market-driven company
that is flush with cash, its no reason to berate people in public, even
if done in a lighthearted way.
i suppose it's my turn to argue for the politically-incorrect perspective.
i don't think it's unreasonable for people to do their homework, a lot of
homework.
i don't think it's unreasonable for us to admit that quality counts, and
that bad ideas are, well..., bad.
i don't think it's unreasonable for the ietf membership to develop
auto-immune responses to badness. quite the contrary, it is praiseworthy.
obviously, it would be preferable if the corporate type in question had more
clue and less agenda.
obviously, it would be preferable for someone to have privately explained
that fact to him or her.
regardless, i want to thank the chair in question for acting as an agent for
adult supervision.
/mtr
ps: i have no idea what incident we're talking about, but that obviously
didn't stop me from commenting on it.