Hi, (just thinking loud as an bystander..) On Tuesday 11 March 2008 18:50, Russ Allbery wrote: > This, however, I find a really interesting argument. I'm not sure it > would actually work, but using the tech-ctte as a final arbitrator of > Policy decisions and actually using that appeal on a regular basis is > something that Manoj and I have both talked about, something that has > constitutional support, and something that may very well work. > > This is something that we could try now without making any changes to the > tech-ctte, if the tech-ctte is interested. If we tried it for a while, > we'd have more data to use to determine whether rotating the membership of > the tech-ctte would be useful. > > Have you raised this idea with the tech-ctte? What do the other members > think of having review of Policy change proposals be part of the tech-ctte > job? How would the mechanics of this work? (Manoj's Policy change > proposal has the tech-ctte as an automatic appeal for any rejected Policy > change, but this sounds more active than that to me.) I like the idea and am actually surprised it sounds new to you. It seems quite logical :-) Great that you want to try it out now! Have fun! :) regards, Holger
Attachment:
pgpVGaIVbT4OU.pgp
Description: PGP signature