Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id XAA23553; Wed, 29 Jul 1998 23:06:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: by cs.cs.utk.edu (bulk_mailer v1.10); Wed, 29 Jul 1998 23:06:46 -0400 Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (cf v2.9s-UTK) id XAA23517; Wed, 29 Jul 1998 23:06:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from upm.edu.my (scc.upm.edu.my [202.184.17.1]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id XAA23499; Wed, 29 Jul 1998 23:06:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from inet.upm.edu.my by scc.upm.edu.my (5.x/SMI-SVR4) id AA17245; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 11:07:13 -0800 Received: from admin.upm.edu.my by inet.upm.edu.my (5.x/SMI-SVR4) id AA15122; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 11:06:16 -0800 Received: from omni.brandenburg.com by admin.upm.edu.my (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id LAA05016; Thu, 30 Jul 1998 11:05:45 -0800 Message-Id: <199807301905.LAA05016@admin.upm.edu.my> X-Sender: dcrocker@mail.bayarea.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1.0.37 (Beta) Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 20:01:50 -0700 To: drums@cs.utk.edu From: Dave Crocker Subject: Re: call for votes on QUIT In-Reply-To: <19980730015215.20128.qmail@cr.yp.to> References: <19980729232651.18393.qmail@cr.yp.to> <199807300004.UAA19371@jekyll.piermont.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" sigh. It continues to be a shame to clutter the mailing list with this sort of thing, but there is a chance that some subscribers are new to the IETF and not aware of some relevant points: At 01:52 AM 7/30/98 +0000, D. J. Bernstein wrote: >Perry E. Metzger writes: >> 1) The IETF doesn't do voting, Dan. >You misunderstand. This vote is simply a mechanism to find out what >everyone thinks. It is binding only to the extent that you respect the >opinions of other people. As stated, we don't do voting. There are techniques for trying to assess the 'dominant' view of the list, but simple vote-taking on a mailing list is not one of them, for a variety of reasons. So, this exercise isn't binding (or even valid) AT ALL and for a number of reasons, none of which include the one rather unfortunate one cited above. >> 2) We also are a rough consensus based organization. There is no >> consensus for what you are asking for, based on the amount of dissent. >I don't believe that your evaluation is accurate. But there's no need to >speculate; the ballots will provide firsthand information. The ballots won't even provide that. There's quite a bit of research and experience on the matter of experimental validity which would explain the reasons, but this isn't the venue for such a discussion. So, just in case anyone on this list was considering sending in their "vote" please don't. It will only make some people THINK that the process has some validity, but perception isn't reality. d/ =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dave Crocker +1 408 246 8253 Brandenburg Consulting +60 19 329 9445 675 Spruce Dr. fax: +1 408 273 6464 P.O. Box 296, UPM Sunnyvale, CA 94086 www.brandenburg.com Serdang, Selangor 43400 United States Malaysia