Re: [Pesci-discuss] Back to the decision-making thing

At 20:58 10/11/2005, Melinda Shore wrote:
>While I think that's generally true, or at least is true in terms of the
>general direction we need to be going in the future, it's an attitude
>which is pretty much completely antithetical to consensus process.
>Consensus tries to ensure that there are no losers per se and that the worst
>possible outcome is that somebody says "I don't agree with that but
>I can live with it and won't block the decision."  It seems possible
>to me that some of the problems we're seeing are the result of creating
>losers and pushing up general frustration levels higher than they need
>to be ("If this is supposed to be a consensus process, why aren't you
>listening to me?").

Agreed. The problem may be that we are not only dealing with 
frustration. To understand it is simple. As Dr. Lessig says, the 
Internet constitution is in the code. The importance of the Internet 
in the world's life means that a part of the constitution of the 
world is decided by the IETF (the WSIS debate is on how to take this 
into practical considerations).

However if the IETF has engineering capacities, it has no 
constitutional competence, responsability and legitimacy, while RFCs, 
BCPs and IANA registries are of major societal, commercial, political 
interest. This means that propositions may be based/opposed for 
motives external to the IETF scope, the IETF has no way to properly 
address and the IESG no legitimacy to deal with.

My suggestion is that these interests are to be addressed in full 
respect and inside of the Internet standard process, by ad hoc 
structures the IETF should help the emmergence.
jfc

_______________________________________________
Pesci-discuss mailing list
Pesci-discuss@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss