If anyone has feedback on the current leadership, please let the NomCom know. See: https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2020/ According to this page, they will be asking for feedback on Wednesday, October 14, 2020: Call for community feedback Bob > On Aug 13, 2020, at 11:35 AM, Nico Williams <nico@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 01:27:31PM -0400, Scott O. Bradner wrote: >> I consider this an abuse of your presumed authority > > The IETF has been abusing its SAA function these past few years. > Download the list archive and search for posts by the SAA and the > reactions to them over the past two years and you should see at least to > previous incidents where the SAA went beyond its remit. We also had an > AD who very inappropriately doubled as SAA -- those who serve as SAAs > should not serve in any other leadership capacity, and this should be a > hard rule. > > The pattern seems to be that once the SAA crosses the line the community > chastises the SAA and then the SAA goes quiet for a year or so. This > means that every time the SAA goes beyond its remit the SAA function > loses authority and ceases to function effectively. Now having three > examples of this, might the SAA will learn their lesson finally? Or > maybe since they insist on misbehaving, the SAA staff should be > replaced. > >> in no way should an expression of disapproval of an IESG action be >> considered as a continuation of the discussion that caused the IESG >> action > > It's rather unseemly, isn't it, to allow expressions of approval and > disallow expressions of disapproval. Either the very first expression > of approval should have met with SAA action on account of the Chair's > silence! order, or no expressions of disapproval of the Chair's order > should have met with SAA action. At most only continued debate should > have met with SAA action. > > Nico > -- >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
