Brian E Carpenter wrote:
We quite often discuss here how to judge rough consensus.
That issue turns up most of the time in inappropriate situations.
I regularly see folks _counting_ opinions when issues have been raised
instead of actually resolving the issues. As previously said,
the most important thing is to drill down and sort out matters of
personal taste from issues are technical or procedural.
Matters of personal taste can be settled by signficant majority,
and "rough" applies almost exclusively to issues of personal taste.
Technical and procedural issues need to be addressed with an issue
resolution process, where alternatives are seriously evaluated.
Here is a snipped from an IESG response to an appeal:
ADs felt that the issue was technical, not stylistic, thus the IESG
as a whole did not have consensus that the issue was non-technical in
Trying to gauge "(rough) consensus" by counting voiced opinions when an
issue has not been reliably determined to be non-technical and
non-procedural _is_ inappropriate. At least that is what I believe
that the IESG thought a couple of years ago.
Ietf mailing list