Subject: Re: MOTION ON NR

From: Ed Gerck <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 13:57:04 -0800

[fwd'd from a private exchange, which might be helpful to all]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: MOTION ON NR
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 13:54:36 -0800
From: Ed Gerck <[email-masked]>

Thanks. I know that many people only see "motion" as a call to
vote, but "motion" is also a proposal for action (dictionary
meaning).

So, knowing how the IETF process works in a WG, my subject 
line tried to convey the idea that it is time for action 
on this matter. Let's stop stomping and dead beating the 
same problem twice in the same year ;-)

Cheers,

Ed Gerck

[] wrote:

> Um, IETF WGs don't have "motions". If you want voting (which I don't think
> you should), those are done as straw polls that are conducted by the WG
> chair(s). You might want to reword your posting as a "suggested change to
> the draft" and see if it gets support and makes it into the next version of
> the draft.
>