Re: not safe

On 10/26/2012 01:16 PM, Danny Ayers wrote:
> On 26 October 2012 19:00, Jens O. Meiert <jens.meiert@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> But this is the rant of a megalomaniac
>>>
>>> Unacceptable: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ListGuidelines
>>>
>>> Repeat occurrences will lead to removal from the Working Group.
>>
>> Sam, do you refer to the email as being unacceptable, or the Google+ post?
>>
>> I agree with the former (calling someone a “megalomaniac” may appear
>> offensive) but disagree with the latter (everyone should have the right to
>> an opinion, and W3C guidelines don't seem to touch this right).

Jens: I was referring to the inappropriate use of this mailing list by 
Danny.

> I might have appeared offensive with my language, but I still don't
> see any reason to retract. Hixie was basically saying "let me take
> over completely", and given that HTML is mega, his major desire can
> reasonably be described that way.
>
> By the way, I've not yet heard from Hixie whether he considered my
> language out of bounds - more interesting test, surely.
>
>> What Ian shares is nothing new. Consensus-based decision making does not
>> lead to excellence.
>
> I don't disagree. But for things like shared protocols, languages,
> excellence isn't the aim, if anything lower-common-denominator is
> better, because it ups the chances of connections. Crude word, but
> exclusivity. The Web works so far not because it's excellent, it
> isn't, HTTP is one of the most stupid protocols going. But it's good
> enough to encourage communication. IMHO, and looking at history,
> that's where the value is.

Danny, this is *NOT* an appropriate use of the HTML WG mailing list. 
Feel free to continue this discussion on www-archive, google+ or your 
own blog.

> Cheers,
> Danny.

- Sam Ruby

Received on Friday, 26 October 2012 17:26:35 UTC