Brian,
As a chair, what I look for are any signs of non-consensus. I don't have a problem with authors publicly supporting the adoption of their draft, it helps to show consensus among the authors that the draft is ready for adoption. As for non-authors, while the assumption is that someone has read the draft before posting support, you can't always know that unless they specifically mention it. However, that's less important to me than anyone saying that a draft shouldn't be adopted, that usually leads to a good discussion of the reasons why the draft shouldn't be adopted, followed by an update to the draft to improve it prior to adoption (or perhaps a discussion about updating the charter if the reason for non-adoption is that it's out of scope).
Cheers,
Andy
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I've been watching several "WG adoption" threads since Prague,
and I have a question.
Is it useful for authors of a draft to send messages saying things
like "I support the adoption of this draft as a WG document." ?
I'm not asking whether it's right or wrong, just whether such
a message helps the WG Chairs in evaluating consensus.
(I see similar messages from non-authors, and I am definitely
doubtful about them unless they start with something like "I have
read this draft and...".)
Brian