[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: address@hidden: Re: archives

From: Andrew Suffield
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: address@hidden: Re: archives
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 12:56:25 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040818i

On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 11:13:20AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> Andrew Suffield <address@hidden> writes:
> >> No, I'm not kidding.   We collectively have something to offer here
> >> and I certainly don't have time to pounce on this.   Are there no IETF
> >> fanpersons on the list besides me?
> >
> > It's been years since they did anything vaguely interesting, so I
> > think you're just old...
> The thing about the IETF is that all the _other_ organizations in
> similar positions (coordinating standards) seem to suck so much in
> comparison -- partly for good reason, but nonetheless.  I think the IETF
> hit an appealing sweet spot for many people because they were
> comparatively looser and less bureaucratic, but still turned out useful
> standards.

I'm not particularly convinced that such an organisation is necessary,
so the "best of a bad bunch" choice isn't really a good one. More
stuff gets done without them these days.

  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' : |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]