RE: The Last Call social contract (was

On 23 Aug 2013 04:22, <l(_dot_)wood(_at_)surrey(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk> wrote:

LC should not be treated as a right of passage, to test the patience of
folks who have developed a document.


rite?


Right - right or rite?

Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood/

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
RE: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard), (continued) RE: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard), l.wood Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard), Thomas Narten Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard), S Moonesamy Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard), Pete Resnick Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard), Scott Brim Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard), Pete Resnick Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard), Barry Leiba Visibility of shepherd writeup, Carsten Bormann The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses), Dave Crocker RE: The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses), l.wood RE: The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses), Dave Cridland <= Re: The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses), Scott Brim Re: The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses), Dave Crocker Re: The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses), Hector Santos Re: The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses), S Moonesamy Re: The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses), Phillip Hallam-Baker Re: Rude responses (Was: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard), Abdussalam Baryun Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard, John Leslie Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard, S Moonesamy Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard, manning bill Re: [spfbis] Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard, Andrew Sullivan

RE: The Last Call social contract (was - Re: Rude responses)