Re: [Terminology] Update to TERM charter text

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 13-Apr-21 22:22, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> Unfortunately, this "problem" is not restricted to GENDISPATCH.  I haven't even been in the IETF that long but I've seen multiple documents - drafts, charters, etc, be exposed to larger review and have the carefully crafted work of a working group be re-considered when it's exposed to a wider review.
> 
> Indeed, this is precisely the function of an IETF last-call - otherwise why do we bother sending work to the IESG for review?  We could just deliver every piece of careful "working group last call"ed document directly to the RFC editor with no cross-sectional review.
> 
> Of course, the flip side is that as a participant in the process, you can ask for the work to be brought back to GENDISPATCH to see whether there's consensus for the new document or not.  Or you could just object to charter in its current form I guess, I'm not sure how that works at IETF last-call stage.  One thing is for sure, the IETF processes aren't good at enforcing that the IETF goes ahead with the exact consensus product of a single working group, unchanged by wider review.

They are in fact very bad at that, because this is the whole point of IETF-wide review of both documents and charters: to prevent echo-chamber effects, confirmation bias and in-group/out-group thinking as much as possible.

That's why the debate belongs on [e-mail], not here.

Regards
   Brian

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Bron.
> 
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2021, at 19:41, Niels ten Oever wrote:
>> Dear IESG,
>>
>> I am dismayed by the discussion in the IESG on the charter and the revisions that are proposed. The charter that was proposed was the product of long and complex discussions in GENDISPATCH. The review in the IESG is now rehashing those debates but changing the outcome. The changes in the charter are thus subvert the consensus that was carefully built. The proposed changes therefore undermine and jeopardize the work that the proposed WG could produce. 
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Niels
>>
>>
>> On 13-04-2021 08:46, Lars Eggert wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > 
>> > there is now an -05 version that rolls in some additional feedback received yesterday: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-term/00-05/
>> > 
>> > Diff at https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fcharter-ietf-term%2Fwithmilestones-00-04.txt&url2=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fcharter-ietf-term%2Fwithmilestones-00-05.txt
>> > 
>> > Thanks,
>> > Lars
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>>
>> -- 
>> Niels ten Oever, PhD
>> Postdoctoral Researcher - Media Studies Department - University of Amsterdam
>> Research Fellow - Centre for Internet and Human Rights - European University Viadrina
>> Associated Scholar - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - Fundação Getúlio Vargas
>>
>> https://nielstenoever.net - [e-mail] <mailto:mail%40nielstenoever.net> - @nielstenoever - [phone]
>> PGP: 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488 643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
>>
>> Read my latest article on Internet infrastructure governance in New Media & Society here: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1461444820929320
>>
>> -- 
>> Terminology mailing list
>> [e-mail] <mailto:Terminology%40ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/terminology
>>
> 
> --
>   Bron Gondwana, CEO, Fastmail Pty Ltd
>   [e-mail]
> 
> 
>