spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Regain control - *was* - When did we losecontrol?

2004-10-22 01:12:08

----- Original Message -----
From: "James Couzens" <jcouzens(_at_)6o4(_dot_)ca>
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 3:10 AM
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] Regain control - *was* - When did we losecontrol?

On Thu, 2004-10-21 at 12:21, jpinkerton wrote:
Well -- it's nice to see that James has managed to overcome his natural
shyness ;-)

Whats a day on the Internet without a little trolling hrm?

It's perhaps a good time for us to start a move towards a slight
"formalisation" of the spf community.

I agree.

I propose that we elect three co-chairs for the spf working group and
three
mail-list managers for new spf mail-lists which will see the project move
forwards.

These are *not* to be the same people, so six people will be involved.  I
chose three on each to ensure a decision at all times ;-)

I propose that the co-chairs should include at least one person who has
extensive experience in commerce and internet politics.

Once this initial step is taken, we can discuss the possibilities of
having
a technical management team to ensure the best is included from the
various
technical proposals,  and getting a small PR team together. That will
involve a further 6 people at a minimum.

I suggest we have a one week period for nominations for the posts, and a
two
week period for voting.  All nominations and voting will be private during
these periods, but will become public when the count is done and results
published. I am happy to administer this process, unless someone has any
better suggestions.

I further suggest that there is a one week period to discuss this proposal
before it is implemented (or not).

Mmmmmmm far too complicated I think.  Politics are a waste of time.  We
got lots of work done between myself, Meng, Wayne, (Andy was there too
as well as later on Koen, Connor and others (sorry if I forgot I don't
know all the aliases and their real names nor can I even remember fully
all of the aliases present all the time) on IRC and basically filtered
what was being said on the list into the channel and discussed it.  It
worked exceptionally actually.  This was of course because Meng was able
to lead back then.  There were some heated discussions but nothing ever
got personal until later on when certain parties decided to exercise
their god given right to be asshats, and this was well into the
Microsoft Debacle round II.

##############

Perfect - so why can't you all do that now?  You have the brief - make spf
work and don't do anything especially for M$.  Finish spf1 and start on spf2
with multi-scopes, or william's idea, or whatever it take sto get around the
known problems, while retaining backward compatability.

So - stop shouting at the devil and get on with some work !!

###########



No leader is no good.  We need someone unbiased and technically
competent enough to know when its time to put the foot down, and can
make a decision when under fire. Meng flip flopped a bit but on the
whole I thought he did a great job up until the MS crap.


#############

A leader will emerge.  Read below to see about working within
trust................

##############


I most certainly do not wish to do such a thing, nor do I have the time
to, and furthermore I derive far too much pleasure from being
politically incorrect.  I will happily aide in any way that I can
something that in no way involves Microsoft.

##############

Techies normally make bad leaders - as I have said in the past on this list.

##################

BEFORE ANY OF THIS CAN HAPPEN MENG NEEDS TO MAKE A DECISION.

##############

No he doesn't.  If you can't see that he haas done this some time ago, you
are a lot less perceptive than you like to think.  Meng is in bed with M$ -
that's clear now.  SPF is no longer safe with him.

##################

1) SenderID needs to die, we want our half of the name back.

##################

I don't care if Sender-ID dies or not - it's an irrelevance.  We need to
move on now.

##############


2) Subsequent to this, they need to leave our records alone

############

We have no control over what people do with an open source protocol. so just
ignore that  - it's an irrelevance too.

#############

Why do I get the feeling both of those are a "when hell freezes over
even tho we wrote this" type of thing?

Honestly Meng is the only one who can do these things I believe, and to
do so would restore any lost faith I think anyone here might have.

#############

Meng is *so* obviously not going to do anything except continue his meetings
in back rooms.  I suggest you move on without Meng.  Every time you pen a
line like that, M$ have won a round, they gain time and knowledge.



I am and have been a member of many community projects ( as I am sure a lot
of you have been too).  Bear this in mind -

Rules and regulations have no teeth.  As we have seen during the spf
history - Meng was the leader by popular consent, but when he went bad,
there was no method in place to remove him.

What I am suggesting is a co-operative venture undertaken between consenting
adults who have a common interest.  There is no point in having rules
because no-one will enforce them. But why have rules if the individuals are
all working together with a common understanding and mutual trust.  That is
just as effective as a whole raft or toothless regulations.

I find myself here arguing for what already exists - we are already working
in this way.  If it wasn't for people being sidelined into the political
arena, spf1 would probably be finished and agreed by all.

I suggested 3 co-chairs, and I stick with that concept.  A single leader
will *not work* for a project as big as this.

Probably everyone is as sick as me of the politics, the rants, the lack of
progress - so forget all that stuff,  it is chaff deliberately thrown in
your face to distract you from making spf a success.  Unfortunately it seems
to be working  :-(

I applaud those who have managed to come up with new concepts and refine old
ones, to help spf move forward in spite of all this rubbish.  It's a pity
more of the coders didn't stick to doing what they are good at -- 'cos they
sure as hell are lousy politicans :-(



Slainte,

JohnP.
johnp(_at_)idimo(_dot_)com
ICQ 313355492


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>