I think Pete has it. "documents, like football game plans, are not easily drafted in a stadium, with thousands of very interested fans participating, each with their own red pencil, trying to reach a consensus on every word.” - J.Postel manning bmanning@xxxxxxxxxxx PO Box 6151 Playa del Rey, CA 90296 310.322.8102 On 14August2015Friday, at 5:07, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Pete, > > On 13/08/15 22:31, Pete Resnick wrote: >> It should take all of an hour to rewrite this into a draft that doesn’t >> sound like a joint opinion of the leadership. > > I think it's really great that someone can actively participate in > the IETF for many years and serve terms on the IAB and IESG and still > produce statements like that that are a real masterpiece of unfounded > but boundless optimism and naivety:-) > > While it might only take one person one hour to craft new text, > that is utterly irrelevant here, sort of like saying that doing a > hard thing is easy because all you have to do is start. > > I think it's been said before but the answer to you (with which > I know you disagree) is that the resulting text wouldn't really be > any better, that it'd take an awful lot more than an hour's effort > (as folks just would not resist the temptation to add/change/etc > once text is open for edits), that we would lose what some people > consider a benefit in affirming the existing text, and that we'd > be doing all of that for what are in the end process-minutiae > reasons. > > And yes, I know you think there is a distinction that needs to be > made there and (after we IM'd) I know you know (and disagree with) at > least the arguments I've seen/made against that, so I'm pretty sure > we do understand one another, and, should the eventual outcome of > all of this be that we do make this status change in-place, that > it'll be safe to say your preferred approach was considered but > not adopted. > > S. >