Re: Voting Idea? (Was: Last Call: 'Requirements for IETF DraftSubmission Toolset' to Informational RFC)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Thomas Narten wrote:
Personally, I'm more in favor of "votes" than just hums, the reason
being that a count of hands is unambiguous data. In contrast, the
results of a hum are more subject to interpretation, where one's
perspective of the results of a hum may well depend on which side of
the room one happens to be sitting.

FWIW, I personally prefer humming because my belief is that unless the rough consensus is sufficiently strong (so that it's clear no matter which part of the room you stand), the WG should probably be better off seeking better consensus than deciding that (for example) 1/3 of people voted X, and 2/3 voted for Y.


And if one reads from the WG
minutes that "the hum said x", one really can't challenge what that
means, becuase there is no agreed-upon data on which to draw
conclusions from.

This is true, of course.

In contrast, with a count of hands, it's much harder
to argue that 100 to 20 "vote" is not strong support for a particular
direction. Likewise, a "vote" of 5 to 2 says something pretty
significant too, i.e., serious lack of participation.

Very weak humming could also be minuted as such, of course.

Maybe a part of the issue is that when the minute-taker is not a chair, it may be more difficult to document the result of the consensus call.

--
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]