> You see, it is not within the purview of POISSON to decide by itself, > without approval from the IESG, that any process related document is > fair game to be opened, reviewed, and revised whenever POISSON decides > it should be done.
this statement seems unnecessarily polarizing. the problem seems far less deciding that something needs a new consensus than finding a constructive way to develop them. much of this thread is a case in point. though some has been thought-provoking, even my highly-filtered view does not paint a picture of a mature decision process. would you want your baby in this bathwater? clearly not, as you seem to be among the crew trying to remove the bathroom. i would rather focus on how we can make the bathwater sufficiently cleaner that one might be less fearful of entrusting babies to it. i doubt my procmail approach scales well. and i think that scaling is the core of our problem. poisson-like things used to work when we were a fraction of our current size. given that email is one of the worst ways yet invented to build consensus and comfort, and that we still need an open consensus building process, what can we do to make it more scalable? randy
