[Bug 14029] normative reference to specification whose author/editor is undisclosed


--- Comment #32 from Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> 2011-09-06 21:01:51 UTC ---
> because I can exercise habeas corpus on the identified co-editor

Uh...  You must be meaning that term in a meaning that is unfamiliar to me.

> or barring something that drastic, i can ask that identified co-editor a
> question

Which they won't be able to answer because they don't know who Ms2ger is?  Or
which Ms2ger can answer just as well, and which you can ask him just as easily?
 What sort of question could a co-editor answer that Ms2ger cannot?

> since i presume they are hiding something

They are: aspects of their identity.  So do we all.

> and will not respond in good faith

That's a completely warrantless assumption.  Whether someone is acting is good
faith is best judged from that person's actions, not from random assumptions
based on their affiliations or lack thereof....  But I sense we're not going to
agree on the "good faith" issue here, so can we stick to the substantive IPR

Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Tuesday, 6 September 2011 21:01:53 UTC