On Oct 7, 2013, at 3:34 PM, Brian E Carpenter
<brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
So I'd like to dispute Ted's point that by publishing a version of
resnick-on-consensus as an RFC, we will engrave its contents in stone.
If that's the case, we have an even deeper problem than misunderstandings
of rough consensus.
Right, I think what Ted is describing is a BCP, not an Informational RFC.