[apps-discuss] On "supporting the publication of this document"

[Pete Resnick <[e-mail]>]

[Starting with Apps Discuss; maybe I'll post this on the IETF list at 
some point.]

Philosophical thought for the day:

During last call, I occasionally see comments to the effect of, "I have 
read and support the publication of this document." I have to say that, 
as one of the people who has to judge consensus on a document, I find 
these statements...well...useless. Kind of like cotton candy (or "candy 
floss" or "fairy floss" to some of you): Sweet, but completely without 
substance. If you don't tell me *why* you "support publication of the 
document" (e.g., "I think the solution proposed is the right one", or 
"the solution stinks, but it's the only one we have"), then I have no 
way to judge consensus on the *content* of the document. If all you mean 
is that you have no objection to the *content* document, a much better 
formulation would be, "I've read this document. There's nothing in here 
I disagree with, and it doesn't impact any other protocol I care about." 
But without explanation, I have to assume that the reason you "support 
publication" is because you have a wager on how soon we will get to RFC 
10000. :-)

Objections to the *content* of a document are extremely important to hear.
Support of or rebuttal to objections to the *content* of a document are 
very important to hear.
Claims that the *content* of the document solves a problem for you are 
good to hear.
Asserting that you have no objections to the *content* of a document is 
of some interest.
Commentary on the *publication* itself is, really, truly, not important.

OK, back to real work.

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: [phone], Fax: [phone]