On 13 April 2012 12:18, Mike Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Blaine. I must admit, I’m pretty surprised by the tone of your > reply. I’ll say up front that I have absolutely no problem with anyone > disagreeing with me on a technical or tactical basis. If you think I’m > wrong, have at it.**** > > ** ** > > But I am pretty shocked that you would decide to impugn my motives. We’ve > only met twice and both times I thought we had really useful and productive > discussions about how to move digital identity on the Web forward – > something I believe that we’re both passionate about. You don’t really > know me, though, which is apparent from your remarks below. I believe that > those who have worked with me for years would vouch that I am a forthright > and evenhanded standards participant who listens to all points of view, > tries to build a consensus that works, and produce quality results. > > > I thought about your note overnight and whether I should reply at all. > I’m fine with give and take, but I believe that I need to say that if you > read what you wrote below, I think you’ll agree that the tone you used was > counter-productive and an apology is in order. > I'm sorry for any offensive comments or tone on my part. I was really taken aback by your comments, because we have had those conversations about Webfinger/SWD, and your technical commentary seemed to me to attempt to intentionally undermine webfinger in ways that I couldn't fathom, given the things we've previously discussed in person. I look forward to moving ahead with future discussions on SWD/Webfinger (frankly, SWD is a better name. ;-) ) in the apps area, and hope that my irate tone hasn't caused any permanent rift. I think we both agree that this work is incredibly important for the future of the web, and I'm hopeful that we can build the best mechanism to provide that future. Best, b.
_______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
