Andy Bierman wrote:
Michael Thomas wrote:
I think the inability of the IETF to make decisions in
an open, deterministic, and verifiable manner is a major flaw.
It promotes indecision and inaction.
Is there any human decision making process that has all of these
characteristics? Or that even believes that those are axiomatic?
Dishonesty by the management is a problem regardless of what system we
have. Most wg's these days have two chairs, so collusion would need
to be
at least that deep, and probably require an AD to be on board too. If
that
really were the case, I doubt any system is likely to perform very well.
Only transparency can prevent corruption.
Preventing corruption is not the end product of the IETF. Producing
good/useful protocol specs is the end product of the IETF. Thus
"corruption" is just one consideration. Life is messy that way.
But this cultural thing does bug me. It seems unsatisfying to me that
our
pat answer to cultural differences is "become more western". The
language issue is already asking quite a lot of the rest of the world.
I don't see the cultural bias here.
Which culture are you from?
Mike
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf