--On fredag, januar 06, 2006 09:02:21 -0500 Sandy Wills <sandy(_at_)WEIJax(_dot_)com>
wrote:
This is not a change; this seems to be the way the IETF works. Many
group gatherings work the same way; to me its an intuitive way of getting
any/all objections brought up, or establishing that there aren't any,
after a period of free discussion.
It's the same as at a wedding, when the preacher asks "if anyone
objects, speak now, or forever hold your peace." A CfC is assuming an
agreement (or don't-care), and only those who do NOT agree need to
respond. Any other response is undesired.
In this case, we've already had the loud shouts of "no", so we're into the
much more tricky case of either convincing the consensus-deciders that the
naysayers are loud, argumentative loonies, or convincing the ones who asked
for the "consensus call" that despite their strongly held convictions,
there are good reasons why we shouldn't just do what they want.....
The CfC (if the original draft could be seen as one) has failed - or rather
- succeded most brilliantly in proving that there is no present proposal
that enjoys a strong consensus.
Harald
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf