I would agree. Perhaps an inquiry as to the motives behind this continual attack that the IETF has endured would help mitigate the situation.
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Jasen Strutt wrote: > "Dean Anderson" > Would you give it a rest already? Take your issue(s) up with the appropriate > person(s) in a separate, mutually exclusive thread, and stop blasting the > IETF list. > > I'm sure you'll be unable to contain yourself and blast yet, another message > out, about how everyone else is wrong, and you have the ideas which lead us > to the wonderland of end all. Therein lies the problem. > > Your continued replies are a surefire way to test my "poignant 'stuff' from > "Dean Anderson" to ignore" ...."rule". > > Cheers- > Jasen > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean > Anderson > Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 10:34 AM > To: Mark Durham > Cc: Michel Py; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Email account utilization warning. > > Mark, > > To fool people, the "phish" has to be plausible. In this case, people > have come to expect capricious behavior from the IETF and so the > "phishing" claim of turning off email capriciously isn't out of the realm > of the expected behavior. People saw the IETF do it before, and expect it > might might happen again. > > "Dean Anderson" is not the topic: The IETF principles are the topic; The > IETF rules are the topic; The misbehavior by people including the IETF > leadership is the topic. Those who don't want to address the problems try > to portray this as about Dean Anderson, or about Dan Bernstein, or about > whoever else is being abused at the moment. It's not about Dean Anderson; > It's not about Dan Bernstein; Its not those other innocent people defamed > and disparaged by a select few abusers. Its about abusive behavior by a > select group, and the willfull, repeated, and perfidious failure of the > leadership to address the abuse, and the participation by the leadership > in the abuse. > > It should not be too much to ask that the IETF Leadership follow the IETF > rules and the IETF principles. Is that too much to ask? When the > leadership acts capriciously, frivolously, perfidiously and acts contrary > to the rules and principles of the IETF, this behavior is observed by > others. These things don't happen in a vacuum. The complaints of Dean > Anderson, or Dan Bernstein, or of anyone else do not bring dishonor to the > IETF. Only the behavior by the leadership brings disrespect and dishonor > to the IETF. And we see the effects of that: People come to expect > capricious behavior from the IETF and so the "phishing" premise isn't out > of the realm of the expected behavior. People saw the IETF do it before, > and expect it might might happen again. Solve the problem: Obey the IETF > principles and rules. Then such "phishes" will be out of character, and > people would be more suspicious of such a "phish". > > > As I said offlist to Mark Smith: > > From: Dean Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Mark Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Email account utilization warning. > > Because I have respect for the IETF, and its principles. It is the IETF > leadership that is disgraceful. > > But it has been the desire of the leadership to run the IETF like a > private club, and many people would be (and have been) driven off by > their behavior. Someone, sometime has to stand up to them. > > --Dean > > On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Mark Smith wrote: > > > If you have such low respect for the IETF, why don't you just remove > > yourself from all associated IETF mailing lists, and stop > > "contributing" too them? > > > On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Mark Durham wrote: > > > Could we try to keep our narcissistic eye on the ball here? > > > > I realize that the only thing on this list that matters to you is you, > > and normally I do what I imagine most of the list is doing: I suffer > > your rants in silence. But recognizing this stuff is actually important, > > and if there are people on the IETF list who don't, that's a situation > > that cries out for attention. Please, for once, let's assume that you > > are *not* the topic, and stay on whatever the topic actually is. You can > > trot out your personal demons (or daemons, for that matter) under some > > other subject line ... and, by all evidence, you certainly will. In the > > meantime, let's not treat every message on this list as your personal > > song cue. > > > > Is this really too much to ask? > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > sleekfreak pirate broadcast http://sleekfreak.ath.cx:81/ _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
