Maybe I have misread the exchange.
But I do expect chairs to receive private comments about the state of things.
And to try to respond helpful to those comments when they can.
And I expect them to make use of that exchange to help the public conversation.
To use a current example, the chair of one working group just said
(paraphrasing)
I have received several comments privately that the description of X
in the document doesn't match reality. However, only person A has
spoken up on the list. If this is a real issue, please speak up on the
list NOW.
Being realistic, there are people who will be reluctant to speak up
on the list. particularly when some of our best and most active
participants have been known to land on folks who disagree with them
like a ton of bricks.
The chair clearly can not let the private comments change the public
consensus. But he can use it to be able to tell people that several
folks agree, and manage the process.
There are also other reasons for sending comments to the chair. For
example, I have sent comments saying roughly ~if I raise X it will
cause a lot of email exchange without resolving anything. As long as
you, chair, think we have discussed it enough I will refrain from raising it.~
And many other reasons come up.
Yours,
Joel
At 07:14 PM 5/31/2007, Andy Bierman wrote:
I don't understand why such a comment needs to be private.
Once the issue comes to light in the WG, it is no longer going
to be private.
You are assuming the Chair can and should be a proxy for a
WG member who wishes to remain anonymous. I disagree.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf