Re: different calendar scales

I expected that my note would not be popular.  I'm not going to respond to 
all your items because it's not worth my time nor the lists.  I too went 
back to try to find concensus - and responded to the list the very few 
times we had any at all.  I too have felt I wasn't doing much - but then, 
I have been assured in private emails, there hasn't been much to respond 
to in the way of concensus.  Believe me, I will lay blame on myself before 
anyone, so as yourself will do so.  That's my style - up front and honest.

Regarding the consortium, this is not a secret.  it was announced 
publically at an IETF over a year and a half ago.  The consortium is a 
non-profit organization - not a commercial one.  I am not going to be the 
person running it.  It is my brainchild as an effort to get calendaring 
and scheduling into the limelight and give recognition to organizations 
that have calendaring products and to give information to those people 
looking for calendaring products as well.  We also hope to host the 
interoperability tests and provide an even better mechanism for this.  It 
is not, nor has it been the intention, of the consortium to go against the 
IETF work.  In fact, it is meant to be a continuation of the efforts.

At least two IETF meetings ago, the Area Directors asked us to make 
efforts to close up the working group.  I asked for more time so we could 
make changes to the three RFC's and to get CAP out the door.  That's when 
I placed the last call.  Everyone knows what happened next.

With regards to insulting, I believe your last paragraph is the most 
insulting of all.  No, I am not endorsing the consortium for commerical 
reasons.  I will not get monies from the organization.  I will not get 
recognition.  I expect to provide hard work, my time, my efforts, all 
towards getting calendaring somewhere other than in the dark ages.

As for asking you if you worked for Doug, it was not meant to be 
insulting.  I saw your email id and saw that it was the same domain as 
Doug's.  It was a curious question - not an insulting one.  I believe when 
I asked you that question, it was also at the same time I privately asked 
you to not be so offensive on the list.  That request, apparently, was not 
heeded.

Again, yet another reason it's probably time to close down the working 
group.  Or, better yet, get another, tougher skinned, working group chair.



Mark Smith <[email protected]> 
Sent by: [email protected]
11/04/2003 18:35

To
[email protected]
cc
[email protected], [email protected]
Subject
Re: different calendar scales







[email protected] wrote:
> 
> As I have said before, everyone, including you, Mr. Smith, should
> respond to this list with constructive comments only.  I'm really very
> tired of the way this list has turned into a series of nastygrams.  I
> continue to get private notes from people saying they no longer
> particpate on the list because of the tone of many of the notes.
>  Therefore, I want everyone - Doug, Mark, Bruce - everyone - to keep
> notes to calendaring topics.  If it continues, I will go back to the
> IETF management and ask them to remove people from our lists.  That's
> a promise.

Remove me if you want, but Bruce's inaccurate posts and your lack
of willingness to act is killing CAP.  You let him ramble on and
on and on about items that have been in the draft for years without
ever calling consensus. That's not Bruce's or Doug's fault - please act.

You seem to be unwilling or unable to make technical decisions. Just
because Bruce posts does not mean that he is right or accurate. He
almost never posts a proposal and almost never responds to questions
and declares that others misunderstand him. And you seem to be unwilling
or unable to notice.

You asked me in private email if I worked for Doug which I found
insulting.
Do you work for Bruce or are you affiliated with Bruce or his company?
What is you motive for allowing Bruce to post inaccurate information
over and over again and then complain when someone calls Bruce on it?

Looking over the archives I can only find a small handful of times
that you called consensus on anything.  No wonder CAP is not finished.

Doug send me private email about a commercial calendar consortium that
you
and someone else are forming wanting to know if I knew or wanted
to participate (as Doug's company runs our calendar servers). Is that
your motive for not acting on CAP? Did you bother telling this list that
you have commercial motives that may keep you from being impartial?