From an earlier message:
Miss Manners would almost certainly say that clogging the <ietf> list
with +1 is bad manners.
I have this scenario in mind:
A -12 comes out and I read it thoroughly and have about 10 points that need to
be addressed.
So I respond to the document (not in last call) and all of the points are
adequately (in my opinion) addressed.
A -13 is issued and sent to last call.
So - I shouldn't voice support? Do I go down in the record as someone that had
voiced concerns? Or do I go down in the record as someone who supports the
document?
At a recent address, Fadi Chehade (the new "head" of ICANN) spoke about the
need for multi-stake holder input, that it was more important than expediency
in going forward. He was talking about ICANN, but his words apply to the IETF
too. What I took from his comments was (and this should be news to no one)
that the goal is to produce documents that reflect as broad a consensus as
possible, the goal is not to produce documents that lack complaints.
If only the whiners speak out, then all we get is the product of nitpicking.
So I believe that shows of support ("+1's) are important, as well as
confirmation that comments raised (against a -12) are addressed (in a -13).
BTW, the -13, -12 and +1's are on different scales, different units, ... uh,
never mind, it seemed funny at the time.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis
NeuStar You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468
There are no answers - just tradeoffs, decisions, and responses.