ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IESG voting procedures

2011-08-15 07:48:57
+1.

One single AD should never be allowed to block a document for which
there appears to be community support. If a document really has
serious problems, it is the job of the AD to rally other ADs or other
impacted community members to oppose the document. Yes, this can be
more work for an AD, but that's what they get paid the big bucks for.

And if they can't do that, that really means the AD is an outlier and
needs to step aside, no matter how strongly they feel about a topic.

Thomas

Barry Leiba <barryleiba(_at_)computer(_dot_)org> writes:

Convincing the entire IESG is a very high barrier, especially when
typically, most of the IESG just wants the issue to go away.    It might
happen for a significant architectural issue, perhaps, but not for an
area-specific technical flaw.

Here's the point: if an AD can't get at least one or two other ADs to
read the document and agree to join in the blocking, then that AD MUST
NOT be allowed to block the document.  That's even the case if the AD
thinks she's found a serious flaw.  Because if, out of 14 others in
the IESG, not ONE other is willing to read the document, understand
the issue, and agree on it.

According to the current rules:

1. If ONE other AD places a second DISCUSS position OR enters a
comment that supports the first AD's DISCUSS, the document stays
blocked.  The "single discuss" procedure does NOT kick in.

2. If the WG still insists on pushing the document and the IESG goes
into the "alternate ballot" (which should be "alternative ballot", but
never mind that) procedure, the DISCUSSing AD still only needs TWO
other ADs to read the document and vote "no".  Three "no" votes will
maintain the block on the document.

Really, if you can't get two out of fourteen technical leaders to
agree with you, maybe you just have to accept that you're wrong.  If
things get down to such a rarely used (read: never) last-ditch
procedure, you can bet that essentially the entire IESG *will* read
the document (you might miss one or two ADs at the most, *maybe*).  If
it gets to that and you're *right* to block, you should be able to
convince two of fourteen to support you.

There is NO case in which it makes sense for a *single* person, with
no peer support or agreement, to be allowed to block a document
indefinitely, no matter HOW serious she THINKS the problem she's found
is.

Barry
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf