Uh - Randy
that's because they all have formally constrained memberships and have
an ongoing relation between them and their participants.
They also do not have people in those entities creating documents which
allege power of attorney for IP that is submitted as part of the standards
process. The IETF does and that is one of the most basic problems here per
se IMHO.
The IETF needs to formally admit is has a membership and that those members
in some cases can speak for themselves and in others cannot. It also needs
to stop making decisions for those participants and come up with better
oversight models for its peer-based processes.
If you want more detail I can spin it for you all day long.
Todd Glassey
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn(_at_)mindspring(_dot_)com>
To: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 11:53 AM
Subject: Re: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process
ratherthansome
Hi -
Strangely absent from this discussion are any examples
of standards bodies that satisfy the critics' criteria. Perhaps
some examples of standards organizations successfully using
processes meeting those criteria would be helpful to focus
this dicussion.
Randy
_______________________________________________
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