1. The offer primarily serves to suggest that the document has questionable
purpose or clarity.
Offering to make the document a Proposed Standard, on the standards
track, suggests that it's questionable? I fail to see that.
3. As negotiating model's go, it is counter-productive to open with a
fall-back offer.
There is no sense in which this is a "fall-back". I see it as a
*better* mechanism for this document than BCP, if the IESG decides
that it agrees. The "experiment" is seeing if the IESG agrees, and
the fall-back is BCP.
Barry
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html