Mike StJohns (not mentioning his DoD employment): "We tend to be able to differentiate between an individual's considered opinion and an unconsidered solicited 'vote' " ... Were the chairs already planning this when in https://archive.cr.yp.to/2026-07-04/09:42:09/4tKUIl5FSz3AqWJndmdORIE1aRf1SV5-8DoiAV-z0A8/https/mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/7l8RfNfdCABM0HYpGrbx-Eja5p0/ they asked voters to say just yes/no?
If they decide to arrogate the power to decide which votes to count, eliminating those they judge as not a reasoned, informed opinion, does the IETF management/board/whatever slap them down hard?
I'm wondering if they can just bulldoze through opposition and make this the fait accompli they wanted it to be all along.
@cazabon After the WG chairs non-consensually ram a document through the WG, the decision to issue an RFC is made by "IESG", a committee of a dozen or so people where the majority are employees of defense contractors (plus one NSA lifer, Deb Cooley): https://archive.cr.yp.to/2026-06-25/07:39:46/T1FKlGNI1p875U2wBe-_XpptOkDGXM7sKvKMgtJVVO0/https/mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/MwSAqD8nZGEHCeCefH82zE4AYBE/
IETF's rules force IESG to solicit community input, but not to pay attention to the input. The only real shot to stop this is the "51%" rule: the WG chairs can't proceed with only 51% or less of the WG.