[adm] Re: [dns-wg] one more effort on the NTIA response

Doug,

> > generally supported the effort.  This is consistent with the discussion of
> > the previous versions of the document, where multiple people had voiced
> > support, with another dissenting individual, who would still not oppose
> > the text going forward as a WG statement.
> 
> Out of curiosity, where do the comments and suggestions that I offered
> fit into this description?

I assume you refer to your message <4914A6ED.40805 at dougbarton.us> dated
Fri, 7 Nov 2008 12:37:01 -0800.  First, the summary above was not meant to
cover the details of every individual response, especially when these
responses addressed earlier than the final draft versions.  Second, my
reading of your contribution is that it's generally supportive, while you
make editorial suggestions and are critical of very few bullet items.
Some of the suggestions have been incorporated, albeit not literally.
In other cases the editors have decided against a change, which is sensible
in favor of convergence and in the presence of maybe competing suggestions.
This has happened to others, including my [hatless] self and is not
unusual.  That said, I still believe we should not have counted your
statement on the "dissenting" side.  I also maintain the consensus judgement.

> > We therefore declare strong WG consensus on the final draft version 1.8.
> 
> I do not object to this characterization. I would simply add that while
> "strong" may be the right adjective, "unanimous" is definitely not.

That is true and the words were chosen deliberately.

> My chief concern remains that as technologists we enter dangerous waters
> when we choose to dabble in politics, and run the risk of producing work
> that is valuable to neither community.

Thanks for that clarification.

Best regards,
   Peter