appeal mechanisms was Re: Ombuds-process

[Eric Rosen]

Keith> But whenever a  WG submits a document that the  WG's AD doesn't like,
Keith> in  most  cases this  is  because  the WG  has  failed  to get  broad
Keith> consensus on a document.

Well, I  understand that that's your  story and you're sticking  to it.  But
can you provide a  reason for anyone to believe this?  Or  do you mean it to
be a tautology, i.e., "broad consensus" means "the AD likes it"? 

Keith> to some degree engineering judgement is and must be subjective, so it
Keith> may  be perfectly  valid  for an  AD  to reject  a  document on  such
Keith> grounds. 

In  areas  where different  engineers  might  reasonably  come to  different
judgments, it is not appropriate for the IESG to substitute its own judgment
for the WG consensus.