Nobody is missing this; you're defending this work. You can't both defend the work itself and place yourself outside of the process as a "chair."
> If you're objecting to the goals of the proposal [1], it'd serve you better to outline which goals are objectionable and why
Many technologists don't have the clout or sometimes the charisma to explain within this rigid framework you have presented why this proposal is such a bad idea. That doesn't mean their feedback should be dismissed outright.
> It's important to actually read and understand the proposal before objecting to it. For example, WEI has nothing to do with ad-blockers or DRM
But it is DRM because it can be used, in effect, like DRM. You are missing the point that most of the community sees this as DRM-like technology, with all of its warts, whether you agree with that conclusion or not.
> At the end of the day, in the case of Chromium, your goal is not necessarily to convince the proposal's proponents, but the API owners
Okay, so, in summary, your points are that the feedback you've read is (1) not yours to address but you are addressing anyway, (2) not valuable within your own value framework (??), and (3) that the opposing viewpoints are misplaced in commenting on the repo which holds the proposal?
> I'd love to discuss this with y'all like professional adults. Can we do that?
Sure, when do you intend to start? Suggesting that opposing viewpoints are "unprofessional" prima-facie doesn't seem like the best way to win hearts and minds.
Edit: Yoav, I'd be happy to respond to you in good faith as I've done here once Hckrnews lets me post it.