Re: Tracking resolution of DISCUSSes

[Michael Thomas <thomasm at thomasm-lnx.cisco.com>]

Michael Thomas, Cisco Systems

On Mon, 15 Jan 2007, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

> > Why not simply:
> > - copy all Comments and Discusses to the WG mailing list
> > - hold all discussions on the WG mailing list until resolution
>
> Why would we do this for technical typos and other things that
> are essentially trivial? I'd expect an AD to enter WG discussion
> when raising fundamental issues, but not for straightforward
> points.

  This seems sort of like a red herring to me: typo posts
  typically don't elicit much wg discussion in my experience.
  But please help me here: it seems that DISCUSS as currently
  instantiated is a conversation between the authors/wg chairs
  acting as liasons with the IESG. This sets up sort of a
  representative democracy kind of situation vs. a direct
  democracy that would be a conversation directly on the wg list.
  I can understand the IESG's desire for filtering, but that does
  place a lot of power in the hands of the wg's representatives.
  And power always begats abuse at some point... is this really
  what was intended?

		Mike

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf