note: This is cross posted to both spf-council and spf-discuss and
therefore I'm wearing my "council member" hat when I say this.
In
<Pine(_dot_)LNX(_dot_)4(_dot_)44(_dot_)0412061001100(_dot_)23330-100000(_at_)sokol(_dot_)elan(_dot_)net>
"william(at)elan.net" <william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net> writes:
I would also remind that SPF Council (as it was called for based on
the results of my poll) should not really be making up policy on its own,
rather it should be acting is similar way to chairs in IETF WG and
ratifying positions that have consensus of the community and in this
case the consensus seems to exist as shown by large number of people
in SPF Community that supported this statement.
Speaking as a council member, I would like to say that I very much
agree with this. The council should confirm that there is a rough
consensus on issues brought up on SPF-discuss and should avoid trying
to resolve technical issues on their own.
Various council members chatted about this subject yesterday on
#spf-council as it relates to the position on Sendmail's white paper
and on alternatives to the "SPF Community's Position On SenderID".
The council should *NOT* authorize the creation of such documents,
that would just add bureaucracy. Rather, everyone in the SPF
community should feel obliged to create the documents and if there
appears to be rough consensus, the SPF council should acknowledge
that.
In <008801c4dc9d$bd0abbf0$4b4c573e(_at_)idimo2> "jpinkerton"
<johnp(_at_)idimo(_dot_)com> writes:
Hang on a minute - 100+ signatures is nothing compared to the 4,900 people
who are on these mail-lists and *didn't* sign it.
The IETF has never judged the number of subscribers to the mailing
list as a basis of reaching a rough consensus, only those that have
expressed an opinion.
It's too late now to
say - "Visit the page and say Yes *or* No", so we'll never know how
"ratified" that document *really* is. As you will gather - I don't like it
one bit, so I didn't sign it. Can you tell me how may others looked at it
and walked away?
There certainly are people who don't like this particular document but
it is far from clear to me that there are enough people to change the
apparent rough consensus on that document.
Since I'm posting this to the spf-council list, I want to make it
clear that I'm talking about general rules of procedures here, not
about any specific document.
And, to get back to my point above: If you do not think there is rough
consensus, please either create a document that you think is better,
or create an *OFFLIST* poll to counter the evidence provided so far.
I think this should be the standard operating procedure for all
issues.
-wayne