On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 03:14:08PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 11:50:08AM -0700, Bill Manning wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 07:08:41AM -0400, Scott O. Bradner wrote: > > > < it started w/ folsk scanning the pages of the early bound > > > < copies of IETFF proceedings. > > > > > > the sheets are no longer included in the proceedings > > > > right - the point is that this has been a problem > > for years. > > How is this a problem if the pages are no longer being included? the sheets still circulate. :) > Do people seriously think (or fear) they are are getting scanned in > the room? i have emperical evidence of the fact. > Or the Secretariat is scanning them and selling them to list brokers > to fund the cookies and soda? :-) that is beyond my paygrade. > It seems almost as if this is more of a perception problem than one > where there is an actual issue with e-mails going to spammers given > the current arrangement. perhaps so. the question was raised, responses were given and judgement has occured. some think it is a real issue, others think its a non-issue and a waste of time. and perhaps both are right in their own narrow pov. for me, the blue sheet issue first drove me to sign & then not provide an email address. these days when I do attend an IETF, I don't sign at all. Of course i don't say much, if anything, so as not to run afoul of the other legal strictures placed on IETF participants. Now Scott claims this is not honest. I will need to spend some time trying to understand why refusing to participate in all aspects of a strictly voluntary process is dishonest. > > - Ted -- --bill Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise). _______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf