![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
> Agreed. And why, in some cases, it is of dubious value to ask WG chairs > or ADs to act in the mentoring process. Unless of course the intent is > to drive people away. Even if, as Randy Bush suggests, the idea as presented, > was ill-conceived, and was being encouraged by a market-driven company > that is flush with cash, its no reason to berate people in public, even > if done in a lighthearted way. i suppose it's my turn to argue for the politically-incorrect perspective. i don't think it's unreasonable for people to do their homework, a lot of homework. i don't think it's unreasonable for us to admit that quality counts, and that bad ideas are, well..., bad. i don't think it's unreasonable for the ietf membership to develop auto-immune responses to badness. quite the contrary, it is praiseworthy. obviously, it would be preferable if the corporate type in question had more clue and less agenda. obviously, it would be preferable for someone to have privately explained that fact to him or her. regardless, i want to thank the chair in question for acting as an agent for adult supervision. /mtr ps: i have no idea what incident we're talking about, but that obviously didn't stop me from commenting on it.
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.