![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
% > Bill said: % > a "winnowing" process is now in effect, making it harder, perhaps % > much harder to allow individual contribution. If I was starting today, % > I'd avoid the IETF as a venue. % % If we are projecting this image, it's a problem. But given the constant % increase in attendance, I doubt if it's really the case. Certainly in my % own WG we have some very active participants who weren't at all involved when % we started, and some of the early activists have moved on. % % If you think that good newcomers are not getting a fair hearing, recommend % them to the ADs as WG chairs. And mentor any newcomers that you happen to know. % % Brian I have reason to beleive that newcomers are NOT getting a fair hearing. Attached is a sanitized bit of email I received in the last week. ------------------------------------ < Just surfed the <WG> archive in response to the issues raised at <the IETF plenary. Are the recent posts representative of the standard mode <of discussion for the list? < < I am trying to decide the extent to which I wish to become involved <in the <specific> area. So far I have had the area director hiss at me when I <stated my company name at the <WG> meeting and been told that certain <solutions could not exist because 'so many clever people have already <considered the problem'. -- --bill
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.