----- Original Message -----
From: "wayne" <wayne(_at_)schlitt(_dot_)net>
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Sunday, December 05, 2004 6:25 PM
Subject: [spf-discuss] Agenda item: SenderID Position Statement
[Note: this is cross-posted to both SPF-council and SPF-discuss]
For the next SPF council meeting, I request that the SPF communities'
position on SenderID be put on the agenda.
One of my candidate pledges said:
I strongly support the "SPF Community Position on SenderID" as written
on http://www.openspf.org/OpenSPF_community_position_v102.html and
have signed it. Since this document was (obviously) written before
the elections, one of my first tasks would be to bring this to an
official vote.
This pledge has now been signed by over 100 people and more people are
signing it daily. At this time, I intend to vote for adopting this
position as it stands.
I do not think that this "position statement" is perfect, far from it.
It suffers from too many suggestions and not enough editing, a
consequence of being an extreme rush job. It is really too long for a
good position statement, and too short for a whitepaper explaining the
position. It contains one or two items that I'm not certain are
absolutely true (but I also don't know are false).
However, I don't think we will ever get something that 100% of the
community will agree on. I think the perfect is the enemy of the good
and that this position statement is good enough.
I encourage people who think they can do better to draft something
they think is better and see if they can get enough support for their
version to be a viable option.
I encourage people who think that the current position statement is
bad enough that it should not be adopted to explain to me why, as a
representative of the SPF community, I should either not vote for it,
or I should vote against it.
Does this mean another "all spf voters" vote? Or are you referring to a vote
within the council -- which is a much better idea -- that's what you were
elected to do.
I think we all knew what people were standing for when we voted for the
council, so we don't need to say anymore, let's get on with things.
Slainte,
JohnP.
johnp(_at_)idimo(_dot_)com
ICQ 313355492