Subject: Re: Useless support claims for draft-zigmond-tv-url-02

From: "Garcia, Miguel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 22:21:26 -0400

IETF members,

CNN Interactive has reviewed the tv: draft proposal (draft-zigmond-tv-url-02).

We support the release of this document as an Informational RFC.

Miguel Garcia

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Miguel E. Garcia
VP, Software Development and Technology Strategy
CNN Interactive
[email-masked]
http://cnn.com

---

From: Pete Resnick <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 22:37:13 -0500

>We support the release of this document as an Informational RFC.

Let's stop this kind of silliness. Miguel:

a) IETF participation is by individuals, not organizations. If *you* 
support the release of this document, peachy, you may feel free to 
say so. If others in your organization do, let them speak for 
themselves. However, for either case, please keep the following 
caveat in mind:

b) We have now had days of complaints about this draft. You have said 
nothing in response to these objections. This leads me to believe 
that you haven't followed any of the discussion, and therefore your 
claim of support for this draft is completely without utility. At 
this point in the discussion, if you don't have answers to the 
arguments that others have made about the draft, then you aren't 
adding anything to the discussion with this kind of message.

c) The form of this message leads me to believe that you personally 
have not reviewed the draft at all; your message is utterly free of 
content. Indeed, it sounds like you have been told to give your 
support by someone else. If you have reasons for supporting the 
publication of this document, state them.

To the IESG: I think this sort of message should be taken by the IESG 
as a reason *not* to publish this document for now. This sort of 
message is an indication that RFC publication is important for 
reasons other than technical merit or use to the engineering 
community, but rather to further some other goals (of which type I am 
sure we can all speculate). There was not even a hand-waving attempt 
in Miguel's message to indicate that he had actually read the 
document or thought that it had technical merit by pointing out what 
he thought were good technical reasons for publication. I think all 
messages of this sort should not only be viewed with suspicion, but 
should indicate that something other than technical review is at work.

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick <mailto:[email-masked]>
Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated
Ph: (217)337-6377 or (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102

---

From: Pete Resnick <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 22:37:13 -0500

pr