Re: Should I* opinions be afforded a special status? (Re: [saag] Declining the ifare bof for Chicago)

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

 



My education did not include Latin, but Wikipedia says there are several kinds of "Firsts among equals." One example is a 'president' and another is a 'chair of an organization.' Surely the first is not inline with our famous saying

"We do not believe in kings, presidents, or voting.
We believe in rough consensus and running code,"

Perhaps that saying is no longer true. As it is we vote, we believe in people with almost unchecked powers, and the consensus processes are ignored with impunity.

Let me stop being cynical and say that it would be worthwhile to iron out the review criteria as clearly as possible. The now "dead" discuss criteria document is a good example of the right direction.

thanks,
Lakshminath

On 6/12/2007 10:17 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
We trust the IESG not only to judge consensus but also to provide
technical mentoring and leadership. We trust the IAB not only to
arbitrate in case of disagreement about consensus but also to
provide architectural insight and leadership.

Yes, that gives them a special status. It's called 'primus inter pares'.

   Brian


_______________________________________________

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]