[Servercert-wg] Ballot SC22: Reduce Certificate Lifetimes

[Ryan Sleevi]

I certainly wasn't trying to imply that it was a perceptive, convincing,
influencing post on its own merits, so my apologies for that confusion!

I'm just curious what sort of information the respondents may have
received, since that can be a well-known biasing factor of surveys, known
as "priming". Such biases can unfortunately undermine much of the
legitimacy or value of such surveys, and that's why it seemed useful to
understand the sequencing of events. My understanding is that this post was
included as a preface to the survey link, and thus may have
(unintentionally?) served to prime and bias respondents in a way that may
have negatively influenced the result. Is it a possibility that the survey
was spoiled like this?

The other interesting and useful factor from the blog post, at least, is
that it states that DigiCert has already decided that it's not valuable,
and is thus opposed. Given such statements, combined with the potential
priming, I'm curious about the intended discussion result? It sounds like
DigiCert decided before they'd even seen discussion, and that nothing will
change that. Is that correct?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/servercert-wg/attachments/20190819/c55d6f9d/attachment.html>