- From: Karen R. Sollins <sollins@lcs.mit.edu>
- Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 15:06:18 -0400
- To: uri@bunyip.com
While people are trying to limit us more and more with rules and regulations, let me ask what it was that I should have done with my recent note and why we should make it so complicated and restrictive for ourselves. The situation was that Larry had said that we could not discuss anything in a session unless there was a draft on the subject. I originally had thought I would put it out as a draft with just my name on it, but in fact it speaks directly to the work we are/are not/should/should not be doing in the URI working group, so it the thinking came directly from the group's activities. Furthermore, the intended audience was the group, and I was hoping to use it to get through Larry's rule about only discussing papers. It won't ever be, shouldn't be, is not intended to be an RFC, but rather to get people thinking and talking about some slightly larger issues that I believe need to be addressed about where standards are and are not appropriate within the scope of the URI group. Where in all the rules would this sort of thing fit? And will I have to wade through lots of rules each time I want to say something to figure out where it fits? Aren't we perhaps getting a little too bureaucratic? I hope we can get work done, without spending significant effort in figuring whether the rules will let us say things that need to be said. Karen
Received on Wednesday, 12 July 1995 15:05:55 UTC