-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Wayne wrote:
Julian Mehnle writes:
There was no formal decision, but search your #spf logs. Do you
really think a formal decision is required?
I'm not sure that there needs to be a formal decision from the SPF
council, but I do think that if the SPF council has never even
discussed the issue that you shouldn't say "the SPF council has
decided ...".
Ok, I'm sorry. I probably should have said "I would like to...".
I think that the productive technical discussions on spf-discuss have
subsided exactly due to the large amounts of management and political
discussions on that list.
I disagree, and you are the only one pushing for this. We have *LOTS*
of stuff to do that I think is far more important that the busy-work
that will be created in trying to split this list.
You found time to do this, but you never found time to send something
to spf-announce about the appeal?
/me boggles
The council hasn't decided that the appeal should be widely announced.
(As a matter of fact, I am not convinced that making big news out of the
appeal before we have a decision from the IESG would be very helpful.)
The only reason why you/ScottK seem to expect me to write an announcement
is because it was me who wrote and submitted the appeal. Please note
that I only wrote the appeal because nobody else would do it, and because
time was running out. Had someone else written and submitted the appeal
with the council's approval, would you still be expecting _me_ to write
an announcement?
Just like the appeal, now that you have started this, you are going to
force a whole long discussion that others will have to participate
in. Ugh.
What makes you think I was going to "force a whole long discussion"?
(Unfortunately I now feel a need to defend myself, extending this very
discussion.)
Yeah, I am really unhappy about this unilateral decision on your part.
I'm just trying to build infrastructure that can help people save time.
Personally, I am often having a hard time selecting the parts of the
communication on spf-discuss that are relevant for me at any given time.
Separating the management and political discussions from the technical
ones would help me (and probably others) a lot.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDGbdQwL7PKlBZWjsRArhrAKCHF/LNCAkUbwD/nbXI/69F/crKJQCfTtT6
AiajHZznQXz6amZiHyOLVW4=
=Z/k5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com