ADs who are also WG chairs

James Seng jseng at pobox.org.sg
Sun Jul 6 13:08:05 CEST 2003


Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
>>It is relevant. A paid-membership vs a no-membership fees is one of the 
>>key differences between IETF & OASIS.
> 
> Nobody is suggesting a paid membership fee for the IETF. Therefore the
> point IS irrelevant.
 >
 > You are continuing to attack a straw man here. It is like attacking
 > the IETF because the IETF meetings have a singificant fee.

Read my email again, please. I did not say you are suggesting a paid 
membership fee for IETF. Neither do I think there is anything wrong with 
paid membership. (I am involved in many other paid membership standard 
organisation too, some of them even more exclusive)

I am saying that the paid-membership makes OASIS very different from 
IETF, fundamentally. So you cannot say "Oh, this and this works in 
OASIS" and assume it also works for IETF.

>>To be a OASIS "TC voting member", you need to be an "eligable member" 
>>and participate in TC activites for at least 3 times. Therefore, this 
>>set the prerequiste that you need to pay some form of memberships to 
>>OASIS in order to participate in OASIS TC.
> 
> Not at all, there are plenty of individuals participating who do not
> pay to participate. But I mention the point only because you might
> discourage people from participating in OASIS groups with your 
> misinformed statements.

According to the OASIS TC process you need to be "Eligible Person" to 
become a TC member.

The definition of "Eligible Person" is "one of a class of individuals 
that includes persons holding individual memberships in the corporation, 
employees of organizational members of the corporation, members of 
organization to which OASIS has extended the benefits of joint 
membership, and such other persons as may be designated by the board of 
directors".

So I am not sure how there are "plenty of individuals participating who 
do not pay"...I could be wrong in reality but going by the rules, that 
is how it is.

> This aspect of OASIS is not particularly satisfactory, however it is
> not alone in having to pay for its secretariat. OASIS is a heck of a
> lot more economical in this regard than IETF. ISOC tells us it costs 
> $800,000 a year to run the RFC editor. That strikes me as a ridiculous 
> sum for a task that should be largely automated.

Ah, one thing we do agree. It is hell lots of money to spend and we 
shouldn't. (Altho I am not sure if it can be automated...)

-James Seng



More information about the Problem-statement mailing list