I'm not mad or anything, but this is a classic IETF antipattern: declaring consensus when one is not the chair.
The reason for this concept is that the chairs get off-list feedback too, and they must evaluate whether a key participant will not go along with a proposal. thanks, Rob On Tue, May 5, 2026 at 5:25 PM Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL < [email protected]> wrote: > > >> Considering the ratio of the “objectors” to the “supporters”, the > consensus seems to be there. > > > > Not your job. > > What’s next — you’ll refuse to pay me for participation here? 😃 > > (Besides, the WG chairs, if memory serves, *did* declare consensus — I’m > merely noting that fact.) > -- > V/R, > Uri Blumenthal > > > *There are two ways to design a system. One is to make it so simple there > are obviously no deficiencies.* > *The other is to make it so complex there are no obvious deficiencies.* > * > - C. A. R. Hoare* > > *I was a shepherd to fools* > *Causelessly bold or afraid.* > *They would not abide by my rules.* > *Yet they escaped. For I stayed.* > * R. Kipling “Epitaphs of > the War. Convoy Escort”* > >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
