Hi Paul,
At 01:56 PM 20-10-2021, Paul Wouters wrote:
Note I'm currently not on the list discussed,
which I would argue is due to the "considerable latitude"? allowed.
The Shepherd write-up or Appendix B of the draft does not list that change.
I personally wish we could separate the content
of the discussion from the method of discussion.
I'd say considerable latitude about topics is
fine, but with respect to the method of
discussion and inclusivity, I would hope less
latitude is granted. Probably better people than
me have already considered this in more depth
than me though, and I don't have any insights to
improve the text here or the list at last call.
I don't remember seeing that discussed in
gendispatch. Driving away people who are on the
opposing side (on an issue) is not a good way to build consensus.
There are unusual cases for which it it is better
to allow some leeway. The determination of when
to do that and how to identify the boundary
requires an understanding of the people and the underlying issues.
I do wish we would retire the term SAA. It's
unnecessarily militaristic (possibly due to
English not being my native language) and seems
like a silly workaround for avoiding the commonly used term "moderator".
The term generally used in other fora is "moderator".
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
