ietf-mailsig
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: NOTE WELL: IETF-MailSig List Participation Rules

2005-07-27 11:23:48

 This is not WG mail list (right now), therefore reference to 2418 and 3934
 as primary ones in regards to management and actions are not appropriate
 at this time.

I work under the theory that the best way to become an IETF working group is to 
act like one, in terms of process and productivity.  

In any event, as I said in the posting, rough consensus decides the issue of 
its 
applicability.


 Also to enable new rules/regulations rough consensus needs to exist to
 do it, not the other way around as you put it.

As I've noted before, there are two approaches to doing group rough consensus.  

One asks for the rough consensus on the affirmative and one asks for the 
negative.  Each has their benefits and their drawbacks. Each is used regularly 
in the IETF.  Both have safety valves.

Asserting that rough consensus exists, without actually asking people to say 
they *agree" requires that the person making the assertion typically be 
correct. 
In other words, it means that I need to feel pretty certain of the group 
preference.  In this case, I do. But note that my being wrong is easily dealt 
with: just develop rough consensus to reverse the decision.  If the group 
really 
does not want to operate under these rules, it will be trivial to get that 
decision reversed.

The benefit of using this "default yes" mode is efficiency.  Things can move 
more quickly and the group can stay focused.  

However, to be painfully and maybe redundantly clear, it only works if the 
group 
supports that mode.

  d/
  ---
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  +1.408.246.8253
  dcrocker  a t ...
  WE'VE MOVED to:  www.bbiw.net



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>