Standards Classification and Reality Problem Statement (was Re: Not a problem statement [ was Re: Killing old/slow groups - transition thinking)

[James Kempf]

> > Hmm, so maybe the issue isn't so much that we don't have the
> > process to deal with the lack of forward progress on PSs, but
> > rather that the IESG's workload is such that this responsibility
> > falls off the bottom of their priority list?
> 
> i dunno how you made that leap.  i guess leaping to conclusions
> about the [non-]acts/reasons/... of others is a popular sport on
> this list.
> 

It was not a conclusion, Randy, it was a question. And you've answered it.

            jak

> implementing procedure to effect the last paragraph of rfc 2026
> would seem mostly mechanical on the surface.  dealing with the
> screaming, chaos, and other social results may be less simple.
> 
> but
> 
>