some/many/most, but not for all. As an example, how will we feel
about having the list contain the names of sockpuppets that have
been active in the IETF?
This question nicely identifies why the proposal makes me so
uncomfortable, and why I don't think I can support it, however much I
think there are contributors worth remembering.
The question assumes that there is an easy way to identify the "we" of
"how will we feel", not to mention an easy way to tell who is a
sockpuppet. Each of us doubtless has perfectly useful and effective
ways of making such identifications, but I doubt they'll be the same
for everyone.
The proposal I posted offered specific roles and types of activity that
would qualify. It also asked some targeted questions.
The proposal is for a list of folk who have been active in the IETF.
That's different from "relevant" to the IETF or active more generally in
the Internet.
So far, the various notes expressing concerns have been quite generic,
or have objected to details that weren't proposed.
It might be helpful to have some comments about the specifics that were
offered. For example, in what way are they inadequate?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net