Hi - My co-chair Martin Duerst and I, and the three independent ltru working group participants we asked (as well as some we didn't ask), are convinced that "LB" is a sock-puppet for JFC Morfin. In consultation with Chris Newman, the responsible area director, we set the "moderated" bit for that subscriber address on the working group mailing list. If "LB" believes we have acted inappropriately, "LB" is free to follow the appeal process described in section 6.5 of RFC 2026.
However, the vocabulary, style, content, and peculiar world-view of this latest missive leave me more convinced than ever that "LB" is indeed JFC Morphin, and that under the terms of RFC 3683 we are well justified in suspending the posting privileges for that address. Randy ltru co-chair > From: "LB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "russ Housley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <ietf@ietf.org> > Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:38 PM > Subject: Re: [Ltru] Possible RFC 3683 PR-action > > Dear Sir, > Like other members of the multilinguistic working list to which I > belong, since 2002 I received a copy of the mails exchanged between > JFC Morfin and your organization, on IDNs then langtags. And we have > often discussed them. I do not thus ignore big matter of this subject > > As JFC Morfin got everything we wanted except again: > (1) that the WG-IDNABIS quickly demonstrates the merits of IDNA or > finds a better solution. > (2) that the RFC 4646 is respected by the IESG what also calls for the > RFC 4646bis underway. > I proposed to replace him as an IETF watcher, given the importance of > his current work. > > In two months, I sent a half-dozen of messages and received courteous > answers. Of course I expected a possible ostracism. I was prepared to > respond with kind understanding. This was the case with Brian > Carpenter. He accused me of being JFC Morfin in an humorous but a way > a little hurtful. We exchanged and he had the courtesy to apologize > willingly and and to inform the IESG about it. > > I would have done the same with Randy Preshun if contacted me, even > impolitely, even after having ignored my question about a significant > breakthrough for us he implied, even after that he probably pushed a > "trap" by misrepresenting our position and that of ISO. Instead, he > dashes into a guerilla of racist censorship against me: it is because > of the MLTF ideas that he accuses me of not being me. > > 2008/3/20, Randy Presuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hi - > > > > There have been expressions of support, and no objections on this list, > > to the proposed metric (and one off-list objection by JFC Morfin) for > > identifying possible sock-puppets of those whose posting privileges > > have been revoked pursuant to RFC 3683. So, we're using it. > > > > We engaged the procedure with three independent working group participants. > > All three identified the same email address, which was also identified by > > the > > responsible area director and both co-chairs. Consequently, future > > postings > > from [EMAIL PROTECTED] will not be delivered, since we believe this address > > is a sock-puppet for JFC Morfin. > > > > Randy > > ltru co-chair > > You will understand that I have reached an age where I am not > impressed anymore and that I have time for a good cause: > -- or Randy Preshun apologizes and it stays there. > -- or he has suspended my rights without warning and is preparing for > a PR action against me without any reason. He does it with the support > of our two direct commercial competitors in his WG. Under these > conditions you will understand that I am not to be giving anything > that enables them to validate a practice of arbitrary exclusion of the > IETF. Today I, whom tomorrow? > -- > LB > _______________________________________________ > IETF mailing list > IETF@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
