On 2007-01-15 17:11, Michael Thomas wrote:
Michael Thomas, Cisco Systems
On Mon, 15 Jan 2007, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Why not simply:
- copy all Comments and Discusses to the WG mailing list
- hold all discussions on the WG mailing list until resolution
Why would we do this for technical typos and other things that
are essentially trivial? I'd expect an AD to enter WG discussion
when raising fundamental issues, but not for straightforward
points.
This seems sort of like a red herring to me: typo posts
typically don't elicit much wg discussion in my experience.
But please help me here: it seems that DISCUSS as currently
instantiated is a conversation between the authors/wg chairs
acting as liasons with the IESG. This sets up sort of a
representative democracy kind of situation vs. a direct
democracy that would be a conversation directly on the wg list.
I can understand the IESG's desire for filtering, but that does
place a lot of power in the hands of the wg's representatives.
And power always begats abuse at some point... is this really
what was intended?
Abuse wasn't intended, obviously, but delegation was.
Put simply, ~200 WG Chairs scale better than ~16 ADs.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf