[LEAPSECS] UTC going forward, one or two definitions? and what about NTP?

[Michael Spacefalcon]

mc235960 <mc235960 at gmail.com> wrote:


> I sympathise, but I expect that if the IUT decide that to redefine UTC =

> without leap seconds, then Dr Gambis and/or his successors will have a =

> paragraph removed from their job descriptions and we will hear no more.=20=


Why should one's job description have anything to do with one's ability
to post to mailing lists from one's personal PC/email on personal time?
The job I do to pay my bills has absolutely nothing to do with
timekeeping, let alone with leap seconds, yet it doesh't keep me from
participating in this and other mailing lists as a private person.

So why can't Dr. Gambis announce leap seconds by personal email as a
private citizen, without any connection to any job?

As I have already said: if I receive an email in my personal Inbox,
and it appears to be from Dr. Gambis' private-citizen personal email
account, and it calls for a leap second, I *will* manually enter that
LS into the timekeeping infrastructure of my personal micronation,
come hell or high water.

SF