Em 18 de jul. de 2023, à(s) 11:59, Steve Crocker <steve@shinkuro.com> escreveu:

Of these two choices, (1) is, IMO, a non-starter. (2), sending it back to the policy process, is a poor but available path. If this is the path the group chooses, I recommend including a cover note that conveys this proposal as a possible solution but the group viewed it as outside its remit to consider.

Why a text approved by this IRT would be a non-starter puzzles me. It’s actually the only text that got consensus at any point in this IRT existence, while all the other suggestions from Org and from IRT members did not.

Which is why not following any of the two choices I mentioned would be an immediate trigger for an RfR. We either respect the consensus and compromise reached before, or we throw it away completely and start over. Replacing by anything lacking consensus is not an option.

Rubens