Poll results (raw)
Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Thu, 30 September 2004 13:35 UTC
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA19770; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:35:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD1Dy-0007mR-BR; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:43:58 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD0sd-0008Ig-Oc; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:21:55 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD0ir-0006Y0-Is for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:11:49 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA18075 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:11:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD0r6-0007Eq-2x for ietf@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:20:21 -0400
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 650DF61C0C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:11:16 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 27978-09 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:11:15 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from halvestr-w2k02.emea.cisco.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 796AD61C0A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:11:14 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 12:52:01 +0200
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Message-ID: <2EC3F940F7842CCDBA14E38A@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.5 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at alvestrand.no
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 97adf591118a232206bdb5a27b217034
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Poll results (raw)
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
At 6:45 Thursday, US ET, the following numbers were available:
162 responses.
Do you have an opinion on the choice between Scenario O and Scenario C?
Yes 114 (73 %)
No, I expect to state an opinion later 22 (14 %)
No, I do not wish to state an opinion 20 (12 %)
I prefer Scenario C 22 (18 %)
I prefer Scenario O 95 (81 %)
Obvious results:
- The 162 answers represent an unknown portion of the IETF list readers
(there are around 2000 subscribers, but we have no idea how many of these
are dead accounts (reducing the number), or how many are redistribution
lists (increasing the number)).
- Most of the people replying to the poll have formed an opinion
- Most of the respondents who have formed an opinion prefer Scenario O
Subject to the usual caveats - assuming that no bugs seriously impacted the
poll, that nobody was deliberately trying to skew the numbers, that the
questions were uniformly understood, and so on.
It's an indication, anyhow.
Thank you, all who responded!
Harald
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- Poll results (raw) Harald Tveit Alvestrand