On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 2:13 AM, Aaron Yi DING <yd...@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:
> On 18/06/13 21:08, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > > When I make a statement at the microphone and then have multiple people > come to thank me afterwards for making that point I don't consider it > pontificating. > > > > sorry, just point it out, sometimes you said it right, but that does not > guarantee you are always right. to correct and make it clearer, "when ... > made a statement, ... people came to thank" for past experience, no > present tense please. > > no further comment, since I actually appreciate what you said and the > intention, as you described below. > It is hard to encourage, much easier to discourage. I thought Peter's attempt at a slap down was completely out of line and demonstrates the problem I am talking about here. Agenda denial is a strategy where to avoid discussing the topic that you know you have a weak case you suggest a change of topic. There is a real problem with accountability and transparency in the IETF constitution which was designed by a bunch of old boys to maintain control in their own hands. Peter is a member of the IETF establishment so of course he sees no structural problem. What I suggested is that the status quo is going to lead to applications area work moving to forums outside the IETF. The Jabber folk have already done this with the XMPP foundation. I have the greatest of respect for Vint Cerf's technical capabilities but he consistently failed to establish open and transparent governance mechanisms. -- Website: http://hallambaker.com/
