In message
<Pine(_dot_)GSO(_dot_)4(_dot_)21(_dot_)0103231623420(_dot_)27946-100000(_at_)regan(_dot_)ee(_dot_)surrey(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk>,
Ll
oyd Wood writes:
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
We're getting far afield, but "tourist" refers to someone who attends
and possibly tries to participate in working groups without having done
their homework. I've lost track of how many times this week I heard "I
haven't read the drafts, but..." or "Did you read the draft? No,
but..."
But isn't cross-group fertilisation and wider exposure of work
supposed to be good for the open process and peer review?
(A stupid idea often remains a stupid idea, whether you've read the
draft describing it or not.)
Of *course* we want wide exposure and cross-group fertilization. And
we also want to educate newcomers. But a WG meeting is generally not
the right place to do it. And although stupid ideas need to be
criticized, what we're often dealing with is the least-bad choice in an
over-constrained situation. You need background to know what questions
have already been asked (and answered).
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb