Richard Barnes <rlb@xxxxxx>'s MUA mangled the quoted text, and I don't feel like fixing it all: > >> Being tenured means that it is possible to disagree strongly about > how > >> things should get done without fearing being dismissed. It really > >> feels like this is what the RSE needs. I think it is notable that > >> Postel/etc. essentially had this kind of security via ISI. mcr> b) It seems that we've seen the situation you describe just now. rb> I'm missing your allusion here. Elaborate? Yes, you said it: rb> It seems to envision a scenario where all of the NOMCOM-appointed, rb> nominally community-endorsed forces are arrayed against this individual, rb> and they are the last thing preventing some bad thing from happening. I am claiming that some think that this situation has just occured, and it resulted in the RSE deciding to do something else rather than attempt to continue fighting against some bad thing happening. (I am not saying that I even understand what the "thing" was, or agree that it was "bad") -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
