appeal mechanisms was Re: Ombuds-process

Spencer Dawkins spencer at mcsr-labs.org
Tue Jul 1 11:52:09 CEST 2003


Dear Keith,

I thought today's quote from John Klensin on the appeals process
was helpful in a broader sense:

> I also deliberately said "remedy" and not "solution".  Suppose
> we have an appeal whose substance is "the solution the WG came
> up with is bad, because..., and doesn't really represent
> consensus, so the IESG shouldn't make it a standard".  "XYZ
> should be the standard instead" might be a "solution", but the
> IESG would be on thin ice if it substituted its protocol
> judgment (and that of the appeal) for that of the WG.  By
> contrast, "the IESG should return this matter to the WG, insist
> that it reconsider the technical matter and gets its act
> together procedurally, and consider whether the current chair is
> the right person to steer that process".   That is a "remedy"
> for the particular problem -- it doesn't require knowing the
> solution.

I think there is a distinction between "this is the wrong answer"
and "this is the wrong answer, and the right answer is ...".

Spencer

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Keith Moore" <moore at cs.utk.edu>
To: <erosen at cisco.com>
Cc: <moore at cs.utk.edu>; <spencer at mcsr-labs.org>;
<problem-statement at alvestrand.no>
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 10:33 AM
Subject: Re: appeal mechanisms was Re: Ombuds-process


>
> ] 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.
>
> That's where you're dead wrong.  WGs are too narrowly focused to be
entrusted
> to impose their own judgement on the whole community.   But a WG that
takes
> the trouble to do its homework and accomodate outside interests is far
more
> likely to be able persuade an AD (and the IESG as a whole) that it's
proposal
> is in the interest of the whole community.
>
> Keith



More information about the Problem-statement mailing list