Document Blocking (Was: I-DACTION:draft-ietf-problem-process- 00.txt)

[Bilel Jamoussi]

Agreed.

Bilel
--------------------------
bnj


-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel O. Awduche <awduche at awduche.com>
To: 'Dave Crocker' <dcrocker at brandenburg.com>;
problem-statement at alvestrand.no <problem-statement at alvestrand.no>
Sent: Fri May 16 15:52:24 2003
Subject: RE: Document Blocking (Was:
I-DACTION:draft-ietf-problem-process-00.txt)

I concur with the sentiments... 

Granting an individual (who purports to be an expert) the authority to 
block a document (that has passed through WG consensus) without a clear,

convincing, and rational explanation demeans the entire process.

Cheers,
/Dan 

-----Original Message-----
From: problem-statement-bounces at alvestrand.no
[mailto:problem-statement-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of Dave
Crocker
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2003 3:14 PM
To: problem-statement at alvestrand.no
Subject: Re: Document Blocking (Was:
I-DACTION:draft-ietf-problem-process-00.txt)


Folks,

PR> The ADs who think that there is a serious problem with a document 
PR> should convince the rest of the IESG that the document is a bad 
PR> idea. Then, the IESG can come to consensus (or unanimity) to reject 
PR> a document (or at least stop it until the problem is fixed).

Exactly right.

No matter how stellar the expertise of someone, if they cannot convince
others that their views are correct, something is very, very wrong.
Permitting them to single- (or double-) handedly block something removes
the the incentive for that person to work at convincing others.


d/
--
 Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker at brandenburg.com>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>  Sunnyvale, CA
USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>, <fax:+1.866.358.5301>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://eikenes.alvestrand.no/pipermail/problem-statement/attachments/20030516/a309a60a/attachment.htm