Hi. I sent in some comments a while back and they sparked a lively
discussion. However I don't think I made the point I was trying to
make successfully and think because of lack of clarity on my part my
point came out much more controversial than I had hoped.
So, here's try #2.
First, I under
*>
*>
*> I also understand there is a long recorded history of interactions
*> with the RFC editor. (There is an even longer oral tradition, but I
*> trust that we all see the undesirability of making governance
*> decisions about a million dollar/year organization based on oral
> "Bob" == Bob Braden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bob>While the IETF needs to be able to manage its revenue
Bob> streams against its expense expectations, it also needs to
Bob> respect the needs of supporting organizations to manage their
Bob> own affairs. That is, the te
*>
*> > "Bob" == Bob Braden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
*>
*>
*> Bob>While the IETF needs to be able to manage its revenue
*> Bob> streams against its expense expectations, it also needs to
*> Bob> respect the needs of supporting organizations to manage their
> "Bob" == Bob Braden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bob> I must confess that I did not quite understand your concerns
Bob> (my fault, I am sure). Some discussions of the IETF
Bob> administrative functions have bordered on micro-management, I
Bob> believe, but I did not intend to
BTW, the IASA has formulated its approach to this balance:
http://koi.uoregon.edu/~iaoc/docs/IASA-Tao.pdf
and it certainly doesn't include micro-managing the budget.
Brian
Sam Hartman wrote:
"Bob" == Bob Braden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bob> I must confess that I did not quite under
