Listing affiliations (Re: OPEN ISSUE: WG Chair Selection (in general))

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand]

--On tirsdag, mai 27, 2003 15:10:41 -0700 Bob Hinden 
<hinden at IPRG.nokia.com> wrote:

> But doing some research (RFCs, IDs, google, etc.) the following list is
> generated:
>
> 1       Alcatel
> 2       ATT
> 2       Cisco
> 1       Docomo
> 1       Hactrn
> 2       IBM
> 1       ICIR
> 2       IIJ
> 2       Lucent
> 1       Microsoft
> 1       Mindspring
> 1       Mrochek
> 1       Neustar
> 1       Qualcomm
> 1       RTFM
> 1       Sun
> 1       Telstra
> 1       Thinkingcat
> 1       UCL
> 1       Vigil Security
>
> A bit different.  I think it is important to always show the company
> affiliations of IAB, IESG, Nomcom, working group chairs, and document
> authors.  Having this information be hidden or murkey can give the
> appearance of "corporate game playing" too.  Much better if everything be
> in the open and transparent.

good point. especially considering that I know that even after a bit of 
research, at least 2 and probably more of the affilliations in your table 
are still wrong!

On the other hand, including the corporate information *everywhere* the 
names get listed seems like overkill, and against our principle of 
considering the person-as-an-individual (as well as increasing overhead). 
Where would you suggest we list them?

(btw.... I use a non-Cisco email address because the corporate mail system 
doesn't work well for me, as well as liking the stability - I've had this 
email through 3 different employers - but the front page of my website 
tells you where I work....)

                     Harald