I agree that the adoption process/practice needs to solve that issue you pointed out for. The way WG adopts may need some suggestions.
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>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 think it is not useful, because it could encourage no
comments. The focus should be on non author's opinion, as they should answer
the question is the work ready/acceptable for adoption?
>I'm not asking whether it's right or wrong, just whether such
a message helps the WG Chairs in evaluating consensus.
I agree. I understand that signals of authors announcing their adoption as saying '' come on WG let us adopt and discuss later any changes'', they should include writing in those threads ''please discuss if there are any comments''. I think authors' announcement does not help me think nor discuss with the WG. Specially it does not help me discuss with them because they already announced as adopted. Not all authors like to discuss their work, they may prefer WG adoption so they can move on.
(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...".)
Adoptions need to be discussed within meetings and list (both are important) and evaluated. I agree that there is less quality in readings of the majority of WG participants, many chairs do ask us to read all drafts, but I hope we get more time or discussions.
AB