Re: On the tradition of I-D "Acknowledgements" sections

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Some people never recognise new comers ideas until backed up with old
comer idea. Do you think that is right? I agree with your suggestion
only if the IETF editor team agree to include you in the possibility
of produce team ideas. I don't think all working groups in the IETF
are giving chance to people/mew-comers to involve/participate, my
experience that I am ignored, so the best way to be valuable for
future reader, is not to let some team to exclude others. From my
experience, I see that some teams just want their document to go
through IESG without comments/delays. Do you think that is good for
the process? This ignorance should be fixed.

AB

On 3/25/13, Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 3/24/13 10:02 PM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>> I like what we have so far, but are those connected
>> processes/information reflected into the produced document? Why
>> ignoring names of volunteers? I suggest to fix this,
>
> My experience over lo, these many years is that the best way to ensure
> that you're recognized is to produce text/suggestions/ideas that other
> people find valuable.
>
> Melinda
>
>




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]