Subject: [Fwd: IETF posting delays]

From: Hector Santos <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 07:35:31 -0400

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Fwd: Re: [IETF] Re: IETF posting delays]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 07:31:13 -0400
From: Hector Santos <[email-masked]>
To: Warren Kumari <[email-masked]>
CC: SM <[email-masked]>, John C Klensin <[email-masked]>, 
[email-masked]

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!

-- 
Hector Santos
http://www.santronics.com
http://hector.wildcatblog.com
jabber: [email-masked]

---

From: Andrew Sullivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 09:52:00 -0400

> land.  So its not working.

I just looked at the subscriber's list available to list members at
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/roster/ietf, and I don't find the string
"santronics" on that page.  There are, however, 30 people whose list
membership is undisclosed, so I might have missed something.  Are you
sure you actually subscribed, though?  Don't forget that there's a
confirmation step.

A
-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[email-masked]

---

From: SM <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 08:12:25 -0700

Hi Hector,

[Cc to [email-masked] and [email-masked].  I note that 
the "visible" email address and the email address in the mailto: are different]

>land.  So its not working.

[snip]

>censorship, especially when the mail appears to be discarded.

I see [email-masked] as subscribed to [email-masked].  There hasn't 
been an announcement, which is required, mentioning that the 
[email-masked] email address is moderated.  The message posted 
around 7 May 2012 23:01:38 -0400 by [email-masked] does not show up 
in the mailing list archive of [email-masked].

The message ([email-masked]) posted by [email-masked] 
around 7 May 2012 18:18:46 -0400 was handed over to mail.ietf.org 
around 7 May 2012 18:19:23 -0400 and distributed to the mailing list 
around 7 May 2012 18:19:47 -0400 without moderation.

It is understandable that there is a perception that the mail from 
the above email address appears to be discarded or moderated.  If the 
escalation path is not working to your satisfaction, I suggest 
contacting the General Area Director ( [email-masked] ).

Regards,
-sm

---

From: Marshall Eubanks <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 11:30:56 -0400

On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 11:12 AM, SM <[email-masked]> wrote:
> Hi Hector,
>
> [Cc to [email-masked] and [email-masked].  I note that the
> "visible" email address and the email address in the mailto: are different]
>
>
> I see [email-masked] as subscribed to [email-masked].  There hasn't been an
> announcement, which is required, mentioning that the [email-masked] email
> address is moderated.  The message posted around 7 May 2012 23:01:38 -0400
> by [email-masked] does not show up in the mailing list archive of
> [email-masked].
>
> The message ([email-masked]) posted by [email-masked] around 7
> May 2012 18:18:46 -0400 was handed over to mail.ietf.org around 7 May 2012
> 18:19:23 -0400 and distributed to the mailing list around 7 May 2012
> 18:19:47 -0400 without moderation.
>
> It is understandable that there is a perception that the mail from the above
> email address appears to be discarded or moderated.  If the escalation path
> is not working to your satisfaction, I suggest contacting the General Area
> Director ( [email-masked] ).
>
> Regards,
> -sm

As I mentioned on May 5th, the IETF has a trouble reporting mechanism,
[email-masked] (or  [email-masked] , they both alias to the
same people).

Has this been reported there ? Bringing in Russ is not appropriate if
the basic reporting process
has not been followed.

Regards
Marshall

---

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 16:37:47 +0000

> CC: SM <[email-masked]>, John C Klensin <[email-masked]>, ietf-
> [email-masked]
> 

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

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 09:49:18 -0700

i have already plonked the troller who wasted my time.  could we drop
this thread?

randy