> 4. As soon as authors notice substantial opposition, they'll quickly realize > they're dealing with an RFC that's very unlikely to pass, and probably eiter > abandon it or go back to the drawing board - and eliminate any contention > that may have otherwise surrounded it.
One other thing I forgot to mention is that if I run the same statistics for the RFCs that were rejected, I *believe* that the most contentious ones would be the ones that garnered around 40-60% of support. These, by definition, are controversial RFCs. Those too are likely not to get too far off the ground and cause storms, and we'd be saving the headache associated with them as well, not just the ones which barely cleared 67%, for the same reason stated in item #4 above. I haven't checked this theory though. Zeev
