Re: [Rfced-future] WGLC Review of the draft

On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 11:51 AM Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com>
wrote:

> On 1/4/2022 2:30 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>
> On 05-Jan-22 07:52, Michael StJohns wrote:
> ...
>
> What I think EKR is saying - and let me use a concrete example - is that
> if 5 people that think changing the numbering system of the RFC series
> proposes that in the RSWG, gets RSWG consensus, but then the community
> overwhelmingly thinks that's a bad idea - well so what?
>
>
> I'm confused. The RSWG is open to participation by anybody. How is the
> RSAB going to conclude that the rough consensus of the community as a whole
> is different from the rough consensus of a WG open to the community as a
> whole?
>
> I see an infinite regression here. It's communities all the way down.
>
>    Brian
>
> Simple example - 5 people in the RSWG saying yes, 10 people in the
> community who don't have time to consider the placement of every comma in a
> document saying no to the general idea of the document.
>
> As I said, leave it to the RSAB to figure it out. If the RSWG thinks they
> got the call wrong, they can refer it to the IAB and IESG per the appeals
> process.
>
The appeals process is actually quite limited. As I noted later in this
issue, it's actually not clear that the RSAB objecting to a document for
some impermissible reason (stipulating that such a thing exists) is in fact
appealable.

-Ekr

And I'm not sure what you mean by communities all the way down - I get the
> relationship to turtles all the way down, but see my email at
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/n60GyjkcFDnoLYL7h0di1doFX_c/
> which should explain why I believe the infinite regression argument is
> specious.  E.g. this specifically:
>
> There's a hierarchy of folk in the community, and the Internet community
> is large when measured by "affected by".   That said, the question is
> NOT "What is the community?", but rather how much of it we can and
> should reach out to during our processes.   The answer is: As broadly as
> we can, but not assuming that we're going to get 100s of 1000s of responses.
>
>
> Later, Mike
>
>
> --
> Rfced-future mailing list
> Rfced-future@iab.org
> https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/rfced-future
>