Re: IESG voting (or not?)

["Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>]

In message <200309181155.h8IBtfp07359@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>, Thomas Narten w
rites:

>
>Note that the iesg-charter document (also on today's agenda) also uses
>the word "vote". Does it need to be stricken from there? Or do we need
>to add a paragraph explaining how IESG "votes" are not "votes" in a
>bad sense? It is hard in practice to not use the term vote at all,
>because in practice that is what we seem to be doing.
>

I've always thought that avoiding use of the four letter word "vote" 
was an exercise in futility.  If it walks like a duck and quacks like a 
duck, it's a duck.


		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb