Sam, It is useful sometimes to differentiate those who have no stake in a particular issue from those who are not paying attention. Sometimes (maybe most of the time) it is not a very important distinction, and the IETF treats it this way all of the time. Maybe that's the right way to go. Maybe not. -- Eric --> -----Original Message----- --> From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] --> On Behalf Of Sam Hartman --> Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 10:51 AM --> To: Spencer Dawkins --> Cc: IETF General Discussion Mailing List --> Subject: Re: objection to proposed change to "consensus" --> --> >>>>> "Spencer" == Spencer Dawkins <spencer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: --> --> Spencer> So... here's the problem. --> >> Personally, I object to the suggestion that my --> "vote" should be --> >> counted one way or another if I am silent. At most, --> it should --> >> be counted as "no strong opinion". Or should I now start --> >> responding to all the Last Calls with "I don't care --> about this, --> >> so please don't count me as supporting it"? --> --> Spencer> Our technology support for "do we have consensus" --> Spencer> stinks. We ask for feedback to a mailing list, knowing --> Spencer> that "me, too" postings are (and should be) discouraged --> Spencer> in most shared e-mail environments. What we get is --> Spencer> exactly what you described - postings from a non-random --> Spencer> subset of participants, and then we try to figure out --> Spencer> what the sampling error is, and in which --> direction, based --> Spencer> on not a lot more information. There is a safety --> Spencer> mechanism, because when we REALLY miscount we can be --> Spencer> appealed, but we don't use it often, and it's really an --> Spencer> expensive mechanism to use. --> --> I'm not sure I consider this very broken. If I'm reading a --> last call --> and I have opinions that differ from the way the discussion --> is going, --> I'm certainly going to speak up. It seems to work fairly well in --> practice at determining rough consensus when there is a rough --> consensus to be determined. It gives questionable results in cases --> where the results are questionable; I'm not sure this a bug. --> --> Spencer> some way to let people say "you know, I just --> don't care", --> Spencer> that would help, too. --> --> And what do we do with those people anyway? How would it help me to --> know there are 30 people who don't care? --> --> --> _______________________________________________ --> Ietf mailing list --> Ietf@xxxxxxxx --> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf --> _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf