Spencer,
I may be just misunderstanding your sense of humor, but it seems
to me that any sort of formal experimental process is too
heavyweight for this, or at least the core issue. It seems to
me that what we have is...
* Jordi noticed a problem and pointed it out.
* Harald indicated that the core issue had been noticed
before and fixed, but the fix had apparently come
unglued between the last meeting and this one... without
anyone but Jordi noticing.
* Some further discussion then suggested that "get
explicit consent as a condition of registration" was
probably better, and certainly no worse, than "notifying
people about what will happen".
I assume that, by now, Harald has told the Secretariat to apply
a fix. I hope they aren't sitting on the request or, if they
are, that we will rapidly see an explanation.
We've also had an almost-separate discussion as to whether it is
necessary/ desirable to post names at the time of registration
or whether it can be deferred until just before or just after
the meeting. And there has been discussion that having the
information visible from registration time forward is of
advantage to some people -- whether checking on one's own
registrations, checking on organizational ones, or deciding to
come or not based on the presence or absence of others on the
list. We don't appear to have consensus on the subject of
desirability. And, on the feasibility part of the question, it
seems to me that one key question is about what is feasible
given other priorities and limited resources. I hope we hear
from the secretariat and the IESG about that, but, at the
moment, I'm waiting.
So what is there that seems to justify an experimental
procedure? This seems to me to fall much more into the "just do
it" (or, indeed, "fix screwup") category for the matter of
consent or notification and into the "no consensus" one for the
matter of posting time.
john
--On Friday, 21 May, 2004 21:21 -0500 Spencer Dawkins
<spencer(_at_)mcsr-labs(_dot_)org> wrote:
Dear Harald,
From: "JORDI PALET MARTINEZ" <jordi(_dot_)palet(_at_)consulintel(_dot_)es>
To: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 10:08 AM
Subject: Re: respect privacy please !
I don't think a legal requirement for our process can jump
over the
laws. Is like if we
decide that we need to sacrifice one of us in every meeting
to sign
the minutes with human
blood, while we know that killing some one is forbidden.
Given the right choice of sacrificial victims, this could be a
spectacular introduction for the first experiment under
draft-klensin-process-july14-02.txt...
But let's not go there for now, OK?
Spencer
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf