Subject: Re: Liaisons interoperation with NOMCOM members

From: Scott Bradner <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 09:50:21 -0400 (EDT)

I agree with Brian:
> I think the text should make it clear that the Nomcom chair can ask
> the IAB and IESG liaisons to leave the calls when appropriate, rather
> than attempting to limit their speech.

Scott

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 06:53:31 -0700

btw, i think both dave and john think they are being constructive
and are acting with good intent.  i just don't think that is the
result.

randy

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 13:14:04 -0700

Randy,

on the offchance that I am the 'dave' you are referring to, I tried to
figure out what your posting referred to.  It certainly did not refer to
the thread it occurred in, since no dave or john had yet posted.

so, Randy, please clarify.

d/

RB> btw, i think both dave and john think they are being constructive
RB> and are acting with good intent.  i just don't think that is the
RB> result.

RB> randy

RB> ----------------------------------------------------------------
RB> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
RB> manager: <http://lists.elistx.com/subscribe>

d/
--
 Dave Crocker <mailto:[email-masked]>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
 Sunnyvale, CA  USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>, <fax:+1.866.358.5301>

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 19:08:44 -0700

it should be obvious by the kind tone of the message that it was
a forgery.

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 19:35:49 -0700

Randy,

alas, from the received headers, this means that your system, psg.com,
has been compromised.

i guess that would explain a number of different postings purporting to
be from you, recently, that did indeed have a more even-handed tone than
usual.

d/

RB> it should be obvious by the kind tone of the message that it was
RB> a forgery.

d/

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 19:43:31 -0700

as i think even charlie agreed, security is indeed an important issue
for today's internet.

randy

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 14:02:31 -0700

Randy,

RB> as i think even charlie agreed, security is indeed an important issue
RB> for today's internet.

Yet another, wonderfully clever unresponsive response. Gosh you're good
at them.

However, since your original posting was in fact *not* a forgery, it
means that an area director has made a public statement that a couple of
contributors are having a destructive effect.

Your position carries an obligation to do more than simply make such
pronouncements.

You have an obligation to explain them.

On the natural assumption that you, yourself, have constructive intent,
then please engage in forthcoming dialogue, rather than just launching
such public criticisms and then trying to dodge the consequences.

d/

>> >> RB>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------

d/