See my reply to Alissa for the rest. But on these two points: On 31 Mar 2020, at 13:25, Richard Barnes wrote:
We have an immediate, tactical decision to make, with time constraints such that the full IETF consensus process is not viable.
That's the crux of the disagreement. We have to get the decision made in a bit over a month according to everyone. (If the ISOC President chooses someone who has gone to 3 out of 4 meetings IETF 103-106, then we've even got longer.) That's perfectly viable. There's no need to rush to the extent the IESG is doing so.
And if they screw it up, we can fix it when we have time.
There are outcomes that are fixable. There are outcomes that are not. Why go down a road that does not need to be gone down? The current processes are agile enough for this particular case.
pr -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best
