last call results - process document

[Spencer Dawkins]

FWIW, I'm also not sure that we ever had "working group consensus" on
the process document. What we DID have was reasonable acceptance of
suggestions for moving forward on the short-term stuff, and I offer as
evidence the point that almost everything proposed in 5.1 of the
document is happening now.

And, based on the low level of energy and participation in
Minneapolis, I'm not sure what "working group consensus" would look
like, these days.

Spencer

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Keith Moore" <moore at cs.utk.edu>
To: "Melinda Shore" <mshore at cisco.com>
Cc: <problem-statement at alvestrand.no>; <moore at cs.utk.edu>
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 7:10 PM
Subject: Re: last call results - process document


> > which several people felt was unclear (because it is).  Here's
> > a revision which I think is more to the point:
> >
> >           This Informational memo is being released to record
> >           the history of discussions by the Problem WG in
> >           2003.  While there was working group consensus on
> >           the portions of the document describing processes
> >           for short-term and medium term improvements,
>
> no, I don't think so.  basically I don't think this document was
> ever taken seriously by much of the working group, so any purported
> consensus on any of the document is dubious at best.