Subject: #1008 USEFOR 1.5: Suggested language on "followup"

From: John Stanley <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 16:42:21 -0700 (PDT)

Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

> I am pretty sure that John Stanley disagrees with this.

RFC2822 disagrees with this.

RFC1036 and current practice disagree with this.

The previous documents produced by this group that went through last call
disagree with this.

It would be nice if you would let me speak for myself, and when you list 
what disagrees with what, you don't pretend that I'm standing alone.

---

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 07:40:13 +0200

> RFC2822 disagrees with this.

I disagree with your statement about RFC 2822.

I'll let current practitioners speak for themselves.

> what disagrees with what, you don't pretend that I'm standing alone.

The others can speak for themselves, too. You were the loudest voice, so I 
thought it was polite to say that I had noticed.