On Sat, 2012-08-11 at 17:13 +0200, Carsten Bormann wrote:
On Aug 11, 2012, at 16:41, Dave Crocker <dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net> wrote:
consensus-oriented process
Sometimes, though, you have to act.
While a consensus-oriented process*) document could certainly be used to
improve (or deteriorate) the document by a couple more epsilons, I agree with
Randy Bush: Signing it now is a no-brainer.
Grüße, Carsten
*) Well there was a call for comments, and it already supplied the first such
set of epsilons.
That may have to do when time is of the essence.
(That's also what you choose your leadership for.
If we don't like the outcome, we can always decide not to re-elect Russ :-)
Did the IETF morph into a representative democracy while I was sleeping?
Last time I checked, Russ was the chair of a committee of managers,
chosen by a random selection of proles who may or may not have taken the
opinions of others into account in that selection. He was not
"elected", nor does he "speak for the IETF"; ditto for Bernard. If they
wish to sign this statement (with which I, by and large, agree, BTW),
that's fine. If they wish to list all their titles (IETF-bestowed &
otherwise), degrees, etc., that's fine, too, but not if the intent is to
imply that they somehow "represent" me or any one other than themselves.
If support by IETF members at-large is to be signified, then an online
petition of some sort would be a much better idea & much less deceptive.