At Fri, 04 Apr 2008 08:57:50 -0700,
Michael Thomas wrote:
Eric Rescorla wrote:
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 doesn't seem very reasonable to me... if you post on any public
list -- like this one -- your likelihood for harvest is far, far higher.
Let's
face it, in 2008 trying to have "private" email addresses as a spam defense
strategy is oh so 1998.
Oh, I agree.
My only argument here would be that if people actually do this in
significant numbers that accomodating them might be easier than
educating them.
-Ekr
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf