Re: IETF Last Calls and Godwin-like rules

Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com> Thu, 16 February 2012 16:49 UTC

Return-Path: <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 989BF21F87D5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 08:49:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id llK8uTJk8RyF for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 08:49:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pw0-f44.google.com (mail-pw0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A726521F8492 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 08:49:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by pbcwz7 with SMTP id wz7so2860717pbc.31 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 08:49:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=57U6IFAsYYEk5fhgdeO3+jsLBy4XSVdgih8qwz0MH3A=; b=WWktaHxd5zgMmNC+fWGnlKiLp/WKg/65cGmKHEoNiTabUNV5qX70jYSG6/RzlE0uPq SAHD3J/u6Zs1xw+mYHJx+4kisKfDdsOakQNNMU8yY7/buanIEzF5fNymhRshp27mLvIT LZe6ZhutHm4V+zdmpCIeFh28pdyEs6tPLKVjw=
Received: by 10.68.73.138 with SMTP id l10mr15510677pbv.22.1329410959543; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 08:49:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from polypro.local (209-193-56-188-rb1.fai.dsl.dynamic.acsalaska.net. [209.193.56.188]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q10sm14291529pbb.10.2012.02.16.08.49.17 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 16 Feb 2012 08:49:18 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4F3D338B.8000203@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 07:49:15 -0900
From: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.26) Gecko/20120129 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.18
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: IETF Last Calls and Godwin-like rules
References: <20120216153318.29DBE18C0A7@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <CAG4d1reqd-ego44KkdbnFUHT2ZQHrJjE+YBf8se9QXE2n=n7XQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAG4d1reqd-ego44KkdbnFUHT2ZQHrJjE+YBf8se9QXE2n=n7XQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 16:49:20 -0000

On 2/16/12 6:59 AM, Alia Atlas wrote:
> For what it is worth, those who I've seen commenting in the +1 fashion
> recently are primarily people I've known to be active in the IETF for
> years - including some WG chairs.

I tend to be involved with different working groups from the ones
John is, and I've assumed (forgive me) that he's seeing something
somewhere that I'm not.  I've certainly seen the behavior he's
describing (flood of non-participants "voting").  I think there's
a difference between someone who's been contributing all along
participating in a consensus call by posting "+1" and someone
whom you can't tell whether or not actually read the draft posting
"+1" and it would be surprising indeed if the person responsible
for determining consensus (the chair) treated them as equal in
weight.

Actually, come to think of it, we've seen a certain amount of this
concerning the draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request draft.

Anyway, I take the situation that John's describing as annoying
but not an actual problem - we don't decide by voting.

Melinda