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 <dean@xxxxxxx>
To: Mark Smith <ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf