that would test something but I'm not sure you could isolate the spam-fear
factor
Scott
-------------------
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 17:44:47 -0700
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr(_at_)networkresonance(_dot_)com>
To: sob(_at_)harvard(_dot_)edu (Scott O. Bradner)
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org, wgchairs(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Blue Sheet Change Proposal
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
At Thu, 3 Apr 2008 20:10:12 -0400 (EDT),
Scott O. Bradner wrote:
Ole guessed
My understanding is that the blue sheet serves mainly as a record of
"who was in the room" which I think is largely used to plan room
capacities for the next meeting.
the "blue sheets" are required as part of the basic openness
process in a standards organization - there is a need to know
"who is in the room" (see RFC 2418 section 3.1 for the actual
requirement)
the blue sheets become part of the formal record of the standards
process and can be retrieved if needed (e.g. in a lawsuit) but are not
generally made available
as pointed out by Mark Andrews - email addresses can be useful in
determining the actual identity of the person who scrawled their
name on the sheet - so it is an advantage to retain them
I'm trying to understand how the blue sheets contribute in any
significant way to the spam problem - someone whould have to be
surreptitiously copying them or quickly writing down the email
addresses - both could happen but do not seem to be all that
likely there are far more efficient ways to grab email addresses
so, my question is "is this a problem that needs solving"?
The only reason I've heard is that some claim that people don't
write their names on the blue sheets out of concern over spam.
This actually seems like something we could test pretty easily
by counting room entries and blue sheet entries and comparing
the totals...
-Ekr
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf