On 6/22/2015 3:49 PM, Nico Williams wrote: > On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 03:09:50PM -0700, Joe Touch wrote: >>> I suppose the Japanese debt might be a usable substitute for next >>> time, since it's also a large rich country with a large debt. > > More digits! > >> I see no good reason to use debt values other than as a political statement. >> >> The IETF and ISOC make far too many of these, IMO. This is a case where >> there's good reason to do otherwise. >> >> Lotteries are sufficient and prevalent. > > Which lotteries? One per-country would be insufficiently > representative. How shall we choose lotteries and how many per-country? > Should we adjust by relative currency exchange rates? ... > > In case it's not clear: I am being facetious, and I think your concern > should be dismissed. Including U.S. debt numbers is not a political > statement. I claim there is no good reason to repeatedly used the debt value of a single country as such a value other than as such a statement. If you believe there is, then make your case. If not, then we should either rotate countries or omit debt values from this process. Joe