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

[Dave Crocker]

Thomas,


>>I'd actually like to better understand how much of a REAL problem it 
>>is that individual ADs are impropropely blocking documents with the 
>>"single AD veto". There are many comments that imply it happens "all 
>>the time"

PR> I have heard no comments to the effect that "it happens all the 
PR> time". Again, I think this is a caricature on your part.


You have done us the service of offering your candid views about the
current discussion. He has shared his sense of the realities inside the
IESG and his reactions to the public discussion. For these, I am
appreciative.

The problem with being candid is that it invites others to be candid. So
I hope you won't mind, Thomas, if I return the favor.

My perception of the Yokohama plenary was of two, very pronounced
phenomena.

One was of considerable community discontent about the current operation
of the IETF and notably of the IESG.

(I'm *always* disgruntled, my own criticisms don't matter much. But when
I see quite a few other IETF folks disgruntled, it's another matter.)

The other phenomenon of note was a frankly defensive reaction from most
of the IESG.

Please forgive me noting that Pete's assessment of your note matches
mine: You seem to be reacting to things that have neither been said nor
implied, and I am pretty sure they are not felt.

Folks are generally trying to be very careful in what *is* said.

Folks are generally trying very hard to avoid making personal
criticisms.

Folks are generally trying very hard to make constructive suggestions,
including suggesting compromise paths.

(A reminder: Most of the current problems have a long history, beyond
any particular individuals. Individuals do the actions, but the problems
appear to be structural. However, individuals who have been
participating in the problem have an inherent conflict of interest, if
they are in charge of the change process.)

When someone is part of group that is the focus of community
disgruntlement, it is easy to get defensive, to misinterpret what is
said, and generally to entrench into a siege mentality.

Please don't.

The most notable thing about the Kobe "revolution" is how little was
actually changed.

We need to make changes now, but we need to make as few as possible.
This is only possible if the effort to make change is pursued honestly,
as well as constructively.

Caricaturizing core concerns, ignoring core concerns, or trivializing
the difficulties of the change effort will not achieve the results the
community wants.

The effort is not about nit-picking adherence to process details. It is
about problems with productivity and utility.

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>