Re: making progress on State-Info

At 4:49 PM 12/8/95, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>"Rough consensus" can only be tested by polling the list.

What?  If Dave Kristol announces a new draft to this list and no one raises
objections, that sure sounds like "rough consensus" to me.

If we poll list members for their opinions, we discover the majority
opinion, which is more precise than consensus.  I agree that the "Host"
poll was a useful way to resolve a contentious issue.  This is simply not
such a case.

Lou is the only person I recall objecting to the most recent state-info
draft, and he has not backed up his objections with a counter-proposal nor
with a submission of the Netscape cookie proposal (either of which I would
like to see happen).

If I am somehow just wrong that tacit approval equals rough consensus, and
if Roy is right that polling is the only accepted consensus-building
method, then _it needs to happen more often_.

M. Hedlund <>

Received on Friday, 8 December 1995 16:38:21 UTC