objectivity vs. leadership [was Re: Cross-Area Review]

[Ted Hardie]

My guess:  there is more than one reason.  Certainly there are folks who
care deeply about this and who are active participants in the working
group discussion.  There are also folk who are participating only in
the meta-question discussion (how do we judge consensus?  how
do we determine whose ox gets gored, when all proposals have pain
for somebody, but that somebody shifts depending on which proposal
you pick? what kinds of change can the IETF actually manage?).

Speaking personally, I think this is a time for me to be listening, 
rather
than talking.  Like a lot of other folks, I made initial comments around
the San Francisco meeting; since then, I've been trying to listen
to other folks' points and points of view.  Part of that is to avoid
looking like I would try to dictate a result; part of it is to avoid 
looking
like an idiot, as there are people in the discussion with much more
detailed knowledge of this area than me.

I hope that answer doesn't depress Aaron even more,
						best,
							Ted Hardie



On Friday, April 25, 2003, at 12:17 PM, Keith Moore wrote:

>> I am imagining why there are so few IESG and IAB voices in this LL
>> debate and can come up with a few possible reasons, all depressing:
>
> My guess is:
>
> 4. They are worried that if they give the IESG and/or IAB perspective
> they will be accused of being elitist and arrogant.
>