Michael Thomas wrote: > Frank Ellermann wrote: >> Michael Thomas wrote: >> >>> I don't see much if any support for changing the valid first party >>> signature consensus from rfc 5016, and I've >>> seen a whole lot of -1's. >> >> I've seen a bunch of objections against the redefinition >> of originator (i.e. more than Dave+me+Dave+me+Dave+me ;-) >> >> Maybe a poll could help to get a clearer picture of your >> "a whole lot of" and my "a bunch of". If the Chairs like >> the idea, Harald sometimes uses polls, but it's a matter >> of taste. > > I'm all for that if it puts an(other) end to many of these.
I've no problem with polling on some of the issues, but given the traffic in recent days, I think we should wait a while to give folks a chance to catch up with the list. S. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
