Re: Disappointed

On Wed, Sep 22, 2004 at 05:37:18PM -0400, Paul Iadonisi wrote:
> 
> This WG chose to ignore that, instead prohibiting any discussion
> of so-called "hidden" agenda.  It wasn't hidden at all.


It was quite interesting to see that on one hand the 
chairs were strictly claiming that this WG was free of any commercial 
interests and that everyone would be speaking privately on his 
own only, and threatening everyone to be kicked out who dared to 
question this, while this WG was slowly slaughtered by exactly those
commercial interests they disclaimed all the time.


The WG was not really going anywhere forward in a technical sense. 
Instead it - and especially it's chairs - were completely busy with 
not seeing how this working group was failing and destructed. 

I really do not understand what intention someone can have to 
chair a group this way. 

This is the more questionable after the problems with the first
ASRG chair. Everybody stresses that e-mail and spam protection is 
so important. But then it is just left to be triturated between 
commercial interests. 

I've been working on that subject in IRTF/IETF since the very 
first day of ASRG. Since then I've seen virtually everything but 
research and engineering (or only very little of it).

I am under the impression that the anti-spam related working groups
were driven by marketing, public relations, patent claims, business,
people putting themselves in the newspapers and in front of
microphones and cameras, politics and propaganda.

If the IETF will not be able to prevent this in future, it should 
consider renaming itself into ICTF (C=commercialization).


regards
Hadmut