Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] IPv4 Soft Landing BIS

Noah noah at
Tue Jul 25 09:59:50 UTC 2017

On 25 Jul 2017 9:56 a.m., "David Hilario" <d.hilario at>

Hi Noah,

> Jackson
> Thank you for pointing that out as Owen has this tendency of opposing
> everything.

Stating opinions with arguments for or against is not the same as
opposing everything, and I cannot recall him doing any such things

Yes you do not recall. But I recall and Owen's stand on softlanding
proposals is crystal clear. He is the chief opposer. Go back to the

Unlike "Jackson" and others who have clearly stated they do and will
oppose anything coming from certain folks.

Who are these others?

> Will this community only note support and consensus when he supports a
> proposal?

Consensus is again based on reaching the point where most people can
agree that the text is fine, only one sustained opposition is enough
to declare that consensus is not reached and it must be taken under


If one has a sustained valid objection, why should it be ignored and
consensus declared?

Like what sustained objection?

Do you mean those counter policies that were withdrawn or what?

Do you mean suggestions made towards softlanding-BIS.?

There is a tendency to call for and to actually ignore anyone opposing
certain views, this is absolutely wrong.

Show me the evidence of this tendency.

> He keeps denying supports all times and behaving as he has authority to
> decide.

I didn't perceive it that way, he does state the facts and indeed
reminds certain community members of what the bottom up process is all

Yes Owen does have good ideas sometimes but most of the time he just
opposes. This is my subjective view, so please note.

I mostly enjoy reading his ideas and comments, they are usually really
well thought out, I do not always agree with what he says, but such is
the way of a community.
We cannot all think and believe the same.


We really should not allow mob rule to take over, even if people call for

Which mob rule are you talking about?

Can we stop harassing anyone who opposes ones view?
Stating why one opposes something is enough, without having to start
attacking people personally.

Who has harrased anyone. Calling out someone is totally fine. Owen can call
me out anytime and I wont call it harrasment.

Bottom up process and consensus MUST be defended and left in place att all
There is an agreed and documented process, there are WG-chairs, they
can respond when addressed and given they have time.

Ack and that is what I was telling Owen. Let WG-Chairs do play their part
rather than him stating the following in ref: to co-chairs.  " This should,
indeed, be an interesting response."

And there is even an appeal process in case we disagree with the WG-chairs.

Ack which is yet to be effective.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list