Re: Does silence have no value? suggested for draft-resnick-on-consensus-06

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

 



On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Dave Cridland <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Calls for adoption are particularly interesting cases, because if there's no
> response, then as chairman I have to assume there's no interest. This could
> be because of lack of time, of course, but if merely checking the draft over
> for adoption isn't worthy of effort, then I can't really expect that once
> adopted, people will suddenly find the time to do serious work.
>
> In other cases, however, silence can mean assent, or at least no interest in
> arguing against. If a particular open issue in a draft is resolved by a
> small group (or even a single person) picking a solution that works for
> them, then an absence of complaints, despite not being quite the same, nor
> as desirable, as enthusiastic and vocal support, still leads to the same
> conclusion.

One thing I've seen in WGs that I like is if there is a lot of
silence, the chair says what s/he assumes silence implies.  "If you're
silent, I'm going to assume that means you don't have any objection",
etc.





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