Gentlemen,
Since I agreed to replace JFC Morfin to the IETF I sent less than ten
mails. Most had two abnormal reasons. (a)To explain that I am not JFC
Morfin. (b) Because our commercial opponents of our non-commercial
approach did not asked, politely or not, before to accuse me of it;
and to mock my name as did my primary school classmates very long ago.
For their information, we are 5 Louis Blériot to have the phone in
France, more than Randy Presuhns (I just got into red list because of
him).
The one you fear suggested I accept the suggestion of a member of the
IESG: I said that I would ask my friends purely technical
contributions, as much as possible in the form of Drafts. In order not
to waste the time at the IESG.
So it seems to me that the current debate, which I do not have much
time to spend and who is in a language that I do not master, has two
other goals.
- Discredit these Drafts in case they would allow the internet to "work better".
- Protect all the commercial interests by wanting paying members. As
if IETF was afraid that the non-profit lead users may join.
I see what is happening: one wants to prevent small businesses to
speak to the IETF. A single JFC Morfin to protect many's culture,
language, occupation, family was already too much for our competitors
(who came together to sign the PR-action against him). Now one does
certainly not all those he represented!
Is that correct IETF?
--
LB
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf