Re: [ga] Admin note: I have resigned as list monitor

[Sandy Harris <sandy@storm.ca>]

Eric Dierker wrote:

> Tierra Firma - on solid ground.

Sorry, Eric, but I feel I have to call you on this one. As I see it, you're
on exceedingly thin ice.

>  The winds are shifting and it is time for men like Harald to step aside.

You could make a pretty good case for "keep their lawyers off our computers",
disbanding the Intellectual Property constutituency, scrapping UDRP, ...,
or for getting governments and politicians out of the equation. I don't
entirely agree and don't think you'd succeed, but there's certainly an
argument there to be made.

I don't think you have any sensible argument at all "for men like Harald
to step aside."

It is definitely not time for the technical types who built the net to step
aside. Granted, there are non-technical issues, as there always have been,
and it would be silly to suggest the techies run everything.

Internet technical folk have a long and rather impressive record of building
a socially useful network, open and uncensored.

They also have a fine record of resisting government pressures in the opposite
direction. See for example:
IAB and IESG Statement on Cryptographic Technology and the Internet
ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1984.txt
List archives for a discussion of proposals for net.wiretapping, which the
IETF has since firmly rejected:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/raven/current/maillist.html

> They do not fit in with the new genre of hardworking people with open and
> transparent agendas who do not care about control as much as their ideals.

The net was definitely built by an open process, and with ideals in play.

As for "hardworking", an interesting experiment is to go to an RFC search
site such as:

http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcsearch.html

and try a search on various names we see here. People like Alvestrand and
Crocker (let alone Cerf) have impressive lists. Of course this does not 
mean anything they say here is necessarily correct, but it is strong evidence
they've done some work, paid some dues, and deserve some minimum of respect.

Of course there are others who've never written an RFC in their lives that
could be called "hardworking" here. Froomkin and Aurebach have written some
interesting papers, for example.

However, for most people here, including myself (but if anyone cares, see 
www.freeswan.org for what I'm working on), there's no evidence visible
to the rest of us that they are "hardworking" at all, let alone in the only
interesting sense -- working hard for the community rather than for their
own benefit. 

I don't doubt many are, but how are we to know that? Your description above:

> the new genre of hardworking people with open and transparent agendas
> who do not care about control as much as their ideals.

is a little vaque. How do I recognise these wonderful folk? What work
have they done?

> I salute the hardwork and dedication that these men and women put in, in
> service to us stakeholders.  I appreciate how hard it must of been to forge
> this frontier.  And it takes real courage to know when to step aside and let
> the new generation take over. (do you think you could go talk to vint and....
> ;-) )
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html