Poll results (raw)

Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Thu, 30 September 2004 13:35 UTC

Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA19770; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:35:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD1Dy-0007mR-BR; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:43:58 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD0sd-0008Ig-Oc; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:21:55 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD0ir-0006Y0-Is for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:11:49 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA18075 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:11:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD0r6-0007Eq-2x for ietf@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:20:21 -0400
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 650DF61C0C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:11:16 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 27978-09 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:11:15 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from halvestr-w2k02.emea.cisco.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 796AD61C0A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:11:14 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 12:52:01 +0200
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Message-ID: <2EC3F940F7842CCDBA14E38A@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.5 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at alvestrand.no
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 97adf591118a232206bdb5a27b217034
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Poll results (raw)
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

At 6:45 Thursday, US ET, the following numbers were available:

162 responses.
 	
Do you have an opinion on the choice between Scenario O and Scenario C?	

Yes	 114 (73 %) 	
No, I expect to state an opinion later	 22 (14 %) 	
No, I do not wish to state an opinion	 20 (12 %) 	

I prefer Scenario C	 22 (18 %) 	
I prefer Scenario O	 95 (81 %)

Obvious results:

- The 162 answers represent an unknown portion of the IETF list readers 
(there are around 2000 subscribers, but we have no idea how many of these 
are dead accounts (reducing the number), or how many are redistribution 
lists (increasing the number)).

- Most of the people replying to the poll have formed an opinion

- Most of the respondents who have formed an opinion prefer Scenario O

Subject to the usual caveats - assuming that no bugs seriously impacted the 
poll, that nobody was deliberately trying to skew the numbers, that the 
questions were uniformly understood, and so on.

It's an indication, anyhow.

Thank you, all who responded!

                           Harald


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf