On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, jpinkerton wrote:
I'd like to nail this one down folks - please :-)
The current process to elect five people as a council is specifically to
guide the SPF community in it's efforts to complete the job already in
hand - as per the replies to the questions on Williams questionairre
http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com/200411/0162.html
Please be clear - the voters will be voting for that - and that alone.
I was already quite clear that organization that operates with no rules
is doomed to failure. I view this council as having only a very temporary
role to get things started. If I'm elected and other people there do not
want to work on the charter, I'll resign (so the next person on the list
who go most votes could take my place). If others want to work on the
charter and on other things as was listed in my summary, I'll stay but as
long as we have clear schedule to complete the charter and/or bylaws and
agree to disband the council and organize new elections after that.
And as for our work, its is clear that people want to work on completing
SPF draft (i.e. reconciling two current drafts). Does it mean we should
stop there? No! Many will immediatly say that we should then work on
UnifiedSPF and how multiple SPF lookups works together and on SPFv2
protocol specs. That will take sometime, but does it mean its the end
of the road? I do not view it this way, I think SPF organization can be
a dynamic enough entity to have both general goals of impoving email
and doing research and experimentation on email security solutions and can
have specicific work tasks such as SPF Classic, Unified SPF, etc. But it
should be up to the people involved (i.e. spf community) to decide if
another new task is to be added to list of active tasks.
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net