Reading this thread makes me think of two points:
First, as a WG chair, I don't usually count messages. Or if I do, it's as
trivia more than anything else. I do care about the collective sentiment
(I.e. Consensus) and I care deeply about anything that might qualify as a
material issue. An adoption poll is really just a semi-organized period of
time during which I'll evaluate these more concertedly.
Second, when I ask the WG about adoption of a draft I try to indicate
whether I think consensus exists to adopt. I interpret responses in that
context. So, if I say that I think there is consensus to adopt then a bunch
of people agreeing with me doesn't mean much. But it's an opportunity to
hear material objections. I don't usually waste the WG's time on polls
unless I think there is consensus, but I suppose variations on this process
could work for other chairs.
Cheers,
-Benson
On Monday, August 3, 2015, Melinda Shore
<melinda(_dot_)shore(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
On 8/3/15 7:09 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Is it useful for authors of a draft to send messages saying things
like "I support the adoption of this draft as a WG document." ?
I'm not asking whether it's right or wrong, just whether such
a message helps the WG Chairs in evaluating consensus.
I raised this last year on the wg chairs mailing list. I personally
don't find it very helpful, although others have indicated that a
*lack* of support from authors would be interesting.
I generally don't like things that smack of voting, and that includes
"I support" messages that contain no other information.
Melinda