-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of
Michael Thomas
Mike, could be a dog too
I'm not sure what you people have against canines - if a dog can email in
cohesive comments on a draft or working group topic, I say we should listen! ;)
The issue here is not one of identity for email/discussion, but rather one of
identity for consensus declaration. In other words, I don't see anything wrong
with letting anonymous/random beings communicate ideas to the IETF through
email or jabber or whatever. What gets tricky is a WG chair basing consensus
or interest on the email list traffic. The problem is how consensus is
determined, not how we identify contributors.
In the IEEE 802 groups, they have (or used to when I went) a policy of anyone
can comment, but you have to physically go to a certain number of meetings per
year, and continue doing so, to be counted as an actual voting member. (but
anyone from anywhere could become such a member if they participated) That
worked pretty well, because often times they still went with consensus but only
pulled out the "voting members only" policy when something could not be so
resolved. I realize that physically going to IETF meetings is not a model we
want, but for people who don't go, we could require vetting of identity to get
voting status.
-hadriel
p.s. And I for one welcome our new dog overlords. I'd like to remind them that
as a former cat-owner, I can be helpful in rounding up cats to toil in their
dog pounds.
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf