[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Confirming vs. second-guessing

2008-03-18 04:33:33

On Mar 17, 2008, at 11:38 PM, Fred Baker wrote:

On Mar 17, 2008, at 10:05 PM, Lixia Zhang wrote:

Call me an idealist:), I personally believe, generally speaking, it  
is better to put everything on the table, rather than partial info,  
between nomcom and confirming body.

Step up a level: wonder where this discussion is leading to?  
Exactly how to revise 3777?

It sounds like you would rather get rid of the nomcom and have the  
confirming body do the work from the start.

Actually to the opposite: I firmly believed it is the nomcom who makes  
the selection.

If you quote my full messages, I said

     First of all, I fully agree with others it should be
     the candidate's choice about what to disclose to whom.

Just that personally and for myself, I would not mind whoever I had  
concern with to know about it.

I have heard it said that the IETF, in the most recent discussion  
that failed up update that portion of what we now call 3777, had a  
90/10 consensus and didn't come to a perfect consensus.

I did not participate in 3777 formation.  If above is the case, my own  
vote would be that 90/10 is a lot more than a "rough consensus", and  
we should just write down precisely what that is.

I think we have to say what the role and reach of the confirming  
body is, which may require us to think hard about what it means to  
have "rough consensus".

IETF mailing list