I agree with Wayne, Chuck and PHB on this - a new standards group is
"exactly" what's needed. Can we move forward to providing the platform from
which such a standards body can be formed. It will need another "democratic
process" but we've seen now that such a thing is not a bad as a lot of
people foretold. The only people who object to these processes are usually
the ones who don't want them to be successful. FWIW I am prepared to host
another election once the ground rules are established. I think Roberts
rules suck btw, and I would oppose them at every step of the way. They are
only useful to those people who know them inside out and can manipulate the
outcome by "using" the rules. They might be useful in highly beaurocratic
environments where there are some serious conflicts, but we are neither of
those. The best way is to define a simple goal (max 5 words) - something
like "Reduce Spoofing" or "Reduce Spam", depending on how deep you want to
go. Once a goal is defined, the body moves forward on many fronts to
achieve the goal. The number of fronts moving forward is only dependent on
the number of people involved. Too many people want everything closely
defined in small print, and that just doesn't work - IETF are probably a
good example of that ;-)
Forward, the council!!!! Get on with the work and don't do any
navel-gazing, you are all in this for much the same reasons, so don't get
bogged down in deciding what procedure is best - just do the work.........
Slainte,
JohnP.
johnp(_at_)idimo(_dot_)com
ICQ 313355492