Hi, The tone of this is going south in a hurry. Can we please back up?
Everyone here needs to act professionally and reasonably. It is not unreasonable to have to read the draft before commenting. It is wholly reasonable for an author to respond to questions from those that have read the draft. It is wholly unprofessional to demand an email based tutorial not having read the basics. Let's behave ourselves, please. Regards, Tony On 4/1/10 5:30 PM, "Dae Young KIM" <[email protected]> wrote: > Ran, > > Have you ever imagine this case?: > > - You think you made a complete presentation/document so that there > are no more uncertainty. > > - Others will still find difficulty or further curiosity in details > of some part of your material. > > The material might be perfect from your perspective since the whole > idea is in your brain. I'm wondering whether the same brain image > could have reloaded to those of others intact. Even so, there might be > points you forgot/did not think important/ to elaborate more. > > Of course, I read your material, still, being so dumber than you are, > I still have questions. > > Ran, I like your proposal and try to find more reasons to defend yours > than to destroy it. If you don't mind whether those dumb guys out > there catch up with your smart brain, then let it be. > > Regards, > DY > > > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 12:37 AM, RJ Atkinson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 01 Apr 2010, at 08:56, someone wrote: >>> The available documents at your site: >>> >>> http://ilnp.cs.st-andrews.ac.uk/ >>> >>> consists of 3 talks from 2008, 4 Internet Drafts and 10 papers. >>> Do you expect ... anyone ... interested in ILNP to read through >>> all of these ... >> >> It seems entirely reasonable to expect that participants in the >> RRG would at least read the applicable Internet-Drafts first. >> I did that for multiple proposals. Most other Routing RG folks >> also did that for multiple proposals. This is common practice >> and normal expectation in the IRTF (and for that matter, in the >> IETF also). >> >> It isn't difficult or especially time consuming to scan through >> viewgraphs, so many people would choose to do that as a fast way >> to learn the basics of any proposal. Often having graphics >> helps makes ideas more clear. >> >> IRTF Routing RG time, including ILNP, is not part of my job, >> unlike for some people here. Regrettably that really does >> mean that my time available for RRG is limited. >> >> Yours, >> >> Ran >> >> PS: I'll try to get my colleague to update the ILNP project >> web site, but that could take several days to happen... >> >> _______________________________________________ >> rrg mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg >> > _______________________________________________ > rrg mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
