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

["Joel M. Halpern" <[e-mail]>]

Huh?  The community as a whole clearly has the right to review the work. 
  Choosing not to participate in a working group does not give up ones 
right to object during last call or the equivalent.

And when we are talking about procedural activities, the range of 
grounds for participants to object seems much larger.

If the larger community is actually engaged enough to raise a clear 
objection during last call of an RFC Strategic document, then it seems 
that the RSAB needs to be able to pay attention to that.  And the RSWG 
needs to pay attention.

And if that causes a stall in changing a policy, so be it.

Yours,
Joel

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
>