Hello Stan,
I really don't understand why you are reacting so angrily about what I
already said was a crazy idea. I did not propose that we submit that
crazy idea to the [manet] mailing list. Please excuse me for attempting
to have a sense of humor.
And yes I did read Alvaro's mail.
If Vicky does not take the editorial pen, do you explicitly reject it
passing to me? If so, why? I gave the editorial pen up willingly so
that others could share the responsibility, and I don't remember taking
any editorial license which would merit your opposition...
Regards,
Charlie P.
On 4/20/2016 2:34 PM, Stan Ratliff wrote:
Several points -
1. This email shows up on "aodvv2-discuss". This is EXACTLY what we're getting hammered for. I'm tempted to kill this mailing list in the first place.
2. More discussion?!? What, 11 YEARS hasn't been ENOUGH disucssion?!?
3. Did you read Alvaro's email?
4. Regarding the editorial pen - I'm happy to give the pen to Vicky, if she's willing to take it.
At this point, if the "discussion" and/or "process" goes past the 2-week WGLC with no decision, I will *DEMAND* that I be removed from the editing team, and *DEMAND* that my name be pulled from the author list - actually, if we drop into some "just 3 more weeks, please", or "just 1 more IETF, please" mode, I'll *DEMAND* that my name be completely and totally erased from the document. And, I swear by all that's holy - I'll LEAD THE CHARGE to get this thing killed.
Enough.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 5:26 PM, Charlie Perkins <charles.perkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:charles.perkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Hello folks,
I'm almost afraid to read the mailing list comments.
But it seems that there is consensus that more discussion time is
needed.
I wonder what would happen if the WG as a whole promised to do two
things:
- have a civil discussion explicitly aimed towards *completing*
(instead of obstructing) AODVv2
- asked for, say, three more weeks.
Regarding ownership of the editorial pen, I'm happy to take over
but I'll need the .xml or some better luck installing PanDoc
(possibly wrong name here).
Regards,
Charlie P.
