On Sep 10, 2011, at 4:11 PM, Sam Hartman wrote: > I do not think the following types of comments should be considered as > objections when judging this sort of consensus: > > 1) You are not solving the most important problem
I don't think that was anybody's objection. Rather, the objection were against change for the sake of change without any convincing argument that the change would improve things; and/or that the changes would actually make it more difficult to improve things. > 2) This will not do any good IMO, that is a valid objection. Stability in our process is desirable; therefore change merely for the sake of change is undesirable. Keith
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
