On Aug 14, 2011, at 12:24 PM, Russ Housley wrote:
The IESG did make some changes to the voting procedures a couple of years
ago. The change was to make it clear that a single DISCUSS position could
not block a document. That is, the IESG believes in rough consensus too.
The current rules are available here:
http://www.ietf.org/iesg/voting-procedures.html
Yes, I had read those procedures recently. It's those very procedures that I
have a problem with.
In particular this part is particularly heinous:
If an AD cannot get cooperation from the WG and cannot enter a ballot position
that supports sending the document forward, then the AD should switch to
"abstain."
That's completely inappropriate. A document reviewer should never be expected
to pretend like he doesn't have a problem with a document. To expect an AD to
change his vote to "abstain" is asking him to be dishonest and/or shirk
responsibility.
Keith
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf