Re: GIST updated from todays IESG call

> > Request: Perhaps an IESG member could write a "majority opinion" to
> > explain to the NSIS WG why this DISCUSS issue (and any others) could
> > not be resolved.
> 
> The IESG has had quite a lot of discussion around if one needs to
> explain an abstain position or not. We are split on this question,
> but currently there is no requirement on doing that. I am personally
> not happy with this.

I would support a requirement that in the case where there are enough
abstain positions to prevent a document from going forward, then each AD
with an abstain position MUST write a comment explaining why they are
abstaining. 

Of course, in this case each of the abstain positions *does* already (at
least now) have a note explaining why. 

Ross