It leaves the IAOC in control of how it decides that it cannot achieve consensus - and, in particular, I think it leaves it free to decide to shelve a decision until consensus can be achieved if THAT is appropriate - which I think was the intent of "some decisions".
Sheer wordsmithing: Would you consider "If the IAOC cannot achieve consensus, the IAOC may decide by voting" to be reasonable?
Note the change of "will" to "may" - reinforcing the point above - and, mostly as a matter of style, using active voice.
Harald
--On torsdag, januar 13, 2005 17:54:29 -0500 John C Klensin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Harald,
Close, but "no". You don't want to say "some decisions may be made by voting" since it leaves a loose end about how that decision is made. You might say any of
"...the IAOC may, by consensus, conclude that it should make a particular decision by voting" or "...the IAOC chair may decide to resolve a particular matter by voting" or "...if the IAOC concludes that the matter should be resolved, rather than continuing discussion until consensus can be achieved, the decision will be made by voting"
"..., the decision will be made by voting."
or, any of probably a dozen other things, noting that none of the above are the same in practical terms. But please don't say "some decisions" and leave the question as to how to determine which are appropriate to fall into "some" completely open. That just invites time-wasting procedural haggling.
john
--On Thursday, 13 January, 2005 23:20 +0100 Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It seems that we are now more-or-less agreed that "less is more" when it comes to quorum, majority rules and so on - here's a proposed minimum version of what is in section 3.4:
3.4 IAOC Decision Making
The IAOC attempts to reach all decisions unanimously. If unanimity cannot be achieved, some decisions may be made by voting.
[...]
OK?
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
