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