> -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [Fwd: Re: [IETF] Re: IETF posting delays] > Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 07:31:13 -0400 > From: Hector Santos <sant9442@xxxxxxxxx> > To: Warren Kumari <warren@xxxxxxxxxx> > CC: SM <sm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx>, ietf- > action@xxxxxxxx > > I'm giving up. Now using gmail account. > > As you can see with the response below to Warren and cc: Mary, John, > and the IETF list, was sent last night at May 7, 23:01. My MTA > transport logs show it was sent to all four, so I am presuming the > direct mail was received and perhaps you can confirm you received it. > Yet, not posted on the list, not on the IETF archive, my copy never > sent. > > Thats now two submissions by a subscribed member that are in la la > land. So its not working. > > The IETF wants to improve its image with the minority engineering > community? Wants to reduce the noise? Wants to increase IETF meeting > attendance? > > IMO, this policy in place for subscribed member mail holding and > filtering when the mail is never posted, needs to be seriously > reviewed. The perception amounts to nothing else but deliberate > censorship, especially when the mail appears to be discarded. > > I have current plans and budgeting to attend the next two IETF > Meetings. I have second thoughts now, dropping my I-D work and just > stay out of the IETF scene. Who needs the stress! Could we perhaps try being a little bit patient and debugging the problem in a co-operative manner before lobbing rhetorical grenades at the people who can solve the problem you're having? Because that would be awesome. -MSK