This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources Moved to Last Call
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources Moved to Last Call
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] How to determine consensus for a proposal.
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sander Steffann
sander at steffann.nl
Thu Oct 17 13:20:59 CEST 2013
Hi Sasha, > A couple things that would make the PDP more palatable: > > - would it be too much of an extra burden on the WG-chairs to summarise, briefly, how they arrived at the decision that consensus has been achieved/not achieved? (much like a judge would substantiate how they arrived at a given verdict but maybe not quite so verbose) We do try to do that, but I agree: this this is very important! > - stop the +1 BS. Every voice in support *or* against a proposal to, at least, give a brief reasoning why. I disagree with you here. A policy proposal is made for a reason, and that reason is included in the proposal itself. A +1 is expressing support for the proposal for the reasons specified in that policy. > I consider it disrespectful if one spends much time composing and arguing an objection if it can be overridden by "+1". It is important for the chairs to see the difference between people who don't care about a policy proposal and people who stay silent because they agree with the content. Seeing +1 messages helps here. For example: a proposal with no feedback on the mailing list at all will likely be dropped/withdrawn, but a proposal with +1 replies will likely not be dropped/withdrawn. An objection will always be discussed based on its supporting arguments, and only if the objection can't be resolved will the chairs consider any +1's: we cannot abandon a policy proposal because one person (or a few) have a non-resolvable objection that is not shared by rest of the community. Nobody has veto rights. > It's changing the way Internet resources are being managed, not godsdamn Facebook. I know. Sander
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources Moved to Last Call
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] How to determine consensus for a proposal.
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]