Re: [rtcweb] Last day for any additional Video Codec Selection alternatives

+1 to Emil's comments seems some people have forgotten that the first phase of this process is a consensus call on whether to go ahead with voting or not.

I am still hoping it won't come to a vote which is unknown territory for the IETF and unlikely to provide any good result.

Andy

On 27 Nov 2013, at 23:32, "Emil Ivov" <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote:

> On 27.11.13, 22:42, Mo Zanaty (mzanaty) wrote:
>> Several folks have objected to a vote. Is it worthwhile to have an
>> alternative that expresses this?
>> 
>> ³Voting MUST NOT be used to decide MTI video codec(s).²
>> 
>> I realize it is whacky to ask someone to vote to express an objection to
>> voting.
> 
> It is indeed quite ironic.
> 
>> But otherwise, how will the chairs/ADs be able to reconcile the
>> objections with the vote results?
> 
> The same way we generally declare consensus or lack thereof. A vote would be exactly as nonsensical here as for any other IETF decision.
> 
>> I¹ve only seen a handful of voting objections,
> 
> I haven't seen any arguments against those objections. Just people worried that if a vote does eventually happen their favorite option might not be on the list.
> 
> I haven't seen anyone explaining how any possible constituency would be defended, how non-rights would be determined, or why it is IETFs business at all to resolve questions after clearly proving it couldn't.
> 
>> and only several dozen total voices expressing various
>> opinions, while the rooms seemed packed with hundreds and the list has
>> over a thousand subs. I have no idea where rough consensus lies in the
>> larger community,
> 
> You seem to assume that rough consensus necessarily lies somewhere. It doesn't. Sometimes people agree to disagree.
> 
>> nor how significant voting objections may be in that
>> larger community. But that seems like useful, perhaps essential,
>> information to know how to interpret the results. For example, if 40%
>> objected to voting (as a first choice),
> 
> What if 30% objected to voting as a third choice?
> 
>> that would immediately send a red
>> flag no matter what result was ultimately selected via instant runoff.
>> Conversely, if only 1% objected to voting, that may be less of a concern.
> 
> Or it may be game theory in action. It's an entirely new land where the IETF has not ventured before. Doing so now cannot work! A vote in the IETF is only a reason to contest the results forever and discredit the work of this group.
> 
> If we can't reach consensus then let's call it a day and leave another body do the call if they feel comfortable with it.
> 
> Emil
> 
> 
> -- 
> https://jitsi.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb