On 7/16/23 12:10, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
They don't say directly not negotiable, but the way the WG chair presents the team_result/team_decision makes the WG_participants have no opportunity to disagree, especially if they had a closed_team_of_design.
Based only on your description, I would say this is grounds for an appeal and a request to change the WG chair and revisit previously made WG decisions.
I always ask when I am in any IETF_WG who are our WG participants? the answer will be the posters to the WG_list or the subscribed to the WG_list, so that is not. The subscribe are 50 participants, and the arguing participants on the WG_list are 5, but still when one disagree and 4 are agreeing and we can add two draft_authors agreeing then the chair will say will we have consensus of agreeing even though only 6 agree from 50, so where is the other 43 participants. The WG_chair should make sure at least 25 participants agree then yes there is Consensus.
Consensus is judged by those who speak up. The total number of list subscribers doesn't matter much, because it's fairly normal to have lots of "watchers". Their silence should not be considered as either support or lack of support.
If IETF participants don't understand that a design team is just another source of input with no special privileges, and that *anyone* can propose alternative designs, that is something that IETF should address.
Keith
