Lakshminath Dondeti wrote:
Folks,
If you want the history of this thread, please see the SAAG mailing
list archive.
Thomas,
Your ideas that the "IETF is a meritocracy" and that "I* opinions are
afforded special status" are to say the least worry me. How do those,
I wonder, fit with what's written in the IETF mission web page
http://www.ietf.org/u/ietfchair/ietf-mission.html?
A procedural point, and an opinion of principle.....
The IETF mission, as approved by the IETF consensus process, is RFC 3935.
Offhand, I don't recognize the page you're pointing at, but Google's
only link to it
(<http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg30045.html>) is
dated March 2004, so I suppose I'm to blame for its existence (current
IETF chair: I very much recommend author, date and context also for
"informal" statements - having sinned greatly against that in the past,
I now see the error of my ways...)
But I believe that in neither that page nor in RFC 3935 did we ever
commit the fallacy of saying "one man, one vote".
How the weight one gives to opinions is distributed varies, I believe -
both from case to case and from person to person - but we've never
committed the error of saying "all opinions are equal".
We are very committed to "all opinions should be HEARD" (we do demand
civility, but that is about form, not content), but we've never claimed
to weigh them equally.
HOW the weights are distributed is a far longer discussion.
Harald
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf