On 3/25/2013 12:17 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
On 03/25/13 11:54, "John C Klensin" <john-i...@jck.com> allegedly wrote:
So perhaps a little more guidance to authors and WGs about
acknowledgments would be in order.
or a statement that acknowledgments is not a required section and not
subject to IETF guidance.
or include examples of where, how, when professional considerations are
made.
Keep point to note here, unless you not felt this ignorance and even
tried to privately deal with it without success, its hard to appreciate
what the OP is stating. Its not just about giving one "just dues." We
don't all expect to get ack. But its also possible a reflection of poor
judgement in a draft writing and may help explain some WG conflicts.
Lets say for example of a "bad" acknowledgement section, to have more
than 10, 15 20 or so participants with input, and the author only acks a
few folks, including perhaps names that didn't provide a WG LIST input,
then that may begin to raise questions about the author. Often you may
see this separated with the term "Constructive Input." To me, thats
bullshit. You might as well, leave it out. But that's me.
So I think there might be some general guidelines on adding the optional
acknowledgements.
For me, its generally all or nothing, its not generally nothing. It will
generally also include the "special" contributor, if any. This a a
professional pattern with technical writing in my writing experience
(Not exclusive to the IETF). If this is something he does a lot, you
might not deem it necessary as it may be considered already part of his
"job" and character to help you. There is also individuals, out of the
engineering respect, I will ask first if they have a problem with the
acknowledgement. Some people you need to ask permission. In some cases,
I asked myself not to be included. I was glad to help, but didn't really
wish to show endorsement via an ack.
But always, there are ways to acknowledge it, word it, like adding a
disclaimer that acknowledging so and so does not suggest they endorse
the document goals.
--
HLS
