Re: Non-participants [Re: Experimental makes sense for tls-authz]

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>]

On 2007-10-28 12:18, Bill Manning wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 07:52:25AM +1300, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> > I think the process has proved to be rather resistant to packing of
> > meetings, written statements distributed in the meeting room, and
> > back-channel campaigns to have non-participants commenting on drafts
> > they haven't read. None of which means we should *ignore* input from
> > non-participants, but we should not be ashamed of making a judgement
> > of its weight or lack thereof.
>
> 	all of those activites indicate particpation to me.
> 	could you please clarify "non-participant" in the
> 	context of someone making a contribution (pro or con, 
> 	independently or in concert with others).

Contributing technical input to the discussion of a technical
proposal.

> 	perhaps you have in mind "card-carrying" IETF members
> 	who pay their dues and send their employees to meetings?

No.

    Brian

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf