On 8/24/23 18:46, Rob Sayre wrote:
The point here is that litigating the name of the process is pointless.
I agree with that much. But there's still a difference in perception between discussions made at a "working group meeting" and discussions held in private between some subset of working group participants. Even if all decisions are strictly ratified on the mailing list and subject to Last Call feedback, we all know that some working group participants look like "insiders" while others look like "outsiders" and the insiders have an advantage when trying to influence the working group's document. By the time a working group has mostly-agreed on the shape of the document, outsiders may be able to get minor or peripheral changes made, but they'll have a very hard time getting major concerns dealt with if those changes require substantial reworking of the document.
And of course, doing things in private undermines IETF's ability to claim to be a consensus-building organization. I see no legitimate benefit to that whatsoever.
Keith
