On Nov 28, 2013, at 8:52 AM, Eliot Lear <lear(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> wrote:
While I appreciate the difficult position the chairs are in, I don't
agree with the approach and I believe it is inappropriate for the
working group to make such a decision. Working groups don't vote. Want
to change that process? Better gain IETF consensus first. And I will
argue against any such attempt. There are plenty of other standards
bodies that do vote. Go to one of them if that's what you want.
One of the things to talk about here is the issue of voting versus a coin toss.
The advantage of a coin toss is that nobody can say it was gamed, because
it's random—there is no process to blame if it doesn't go your way. Voting,
however, is somewhat predictable, and can be gamed.
So the concern is that if the working group has consensus to vote, it's
probably because interested parties have some reason to believe the vote will
go their way. They may be horribly mistaken, or they may be correct—that
isn't the point. The point is that they aren't actually okay with the outcome
not going their way.
So if the working group is willing to agree to a vote, and unwilling to agree
to a coin toss, that says something _very important_ about the status of
consensus in the working group.