> From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Because they only get to do it once and have no expectation of
> repeating.
One would think that would make them more likely to make changes, not less.
>> The *whole point* of the NomComm is for it to have roughly the same
>> views as the IETF as a whole, except in a smaller body.
> The people whoe wrote the constitution certainly thought that there
> would be a difference. Otherwise they would have done it the obvious
> way.
You clearly are not paying attention to the words "smaller body", with
the manifold advantages that brings.
> As I said, ignoring the 2,500 years of experience since that date.
> Moreover the Athenian constitution was not exactly a success, they
> murdered Socrates, got whacked in the Peleponesian war and finaly got
> whacked by the Romans.
> Given the fragmentary nature of classical accounts I find it
> astonishing that you would think that you could understand the dynamics
> of the organizations at all, let alone whether they were satisfactory.
> Most of the accounts were written by the people whose interests were
> served by those arrangements. The one dissenting voice, Plato provides
> a critique so devastating that the same experiment is not tried again
> for two millenia.
Alas, much as pointing out the numerous errors above would interest me, it's
a bit far afield for this list. (I'm particularly amused by your calling on
Plato for support - he was profoundly anti-democratic.)
Let me stay somewhat on topic by pointing out that the US Founding Fathers
found the systems of the Greeks (and Romans) worthy of study and inspiration
- so there's at least one group of relatively modern political geniuses who
disagree with your valuation.
Noel
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf