+1, especially if you insert "or a working group" after "IESG".
I feel it's unfair to claim there's a private club if your only evidence is that an idea of yours didn't get support when you shared it. It's also not correct that this is something to take personally. A better use of one's energy would be to get a deeper understanding of the "why", which only enables a more productive outcome the next time.-MSK
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 01:44:24PM -0500, Hector Santos wrote:If someone is carrying out a denial of service attack against an
> Personal filtering is one thing, advocating it to others as a
> general practice is another. That is where the IETF or the WG
> process tends to go sour -- when it does appear to be a "private
> club," and "ignorance" and "Follow the Chieftain" syndrome is high.
> While it is obviously used to move an agenda forward, its not always
> pretty, nor fair when it happens and it hasn't been convincing of
> late the end results are often better. You may get your "RFC" but
> at what cost?
someone on the IESG, recommending that they filter someone who has
proven that they are lacking in clue doesn't seem to me to be the same
thing as a "private club".
- Ted