Re: One week left to object

["Salz, Rich" <rsalz=40akamai.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

• This text suggests you could reiterate *or* restart. However the problem is that the iterate procedure does not leave the overall outcome unbiased, because, as I said, one of the selectees can in fact influence the process.

 

Mike StJohns raised the same concern about gaming the system on August 11 [1].

 

As we all know, it is VERY difficult to write a technical specification in English.  RFC 8713 points to RFC 3797 as a possible method, and that says to ignore ineligible people.  Is someone who doesn’t respond to email ineligible? Does 8713 contradict itself by calling out “can’t reach” and giving special instructions, while recommending 3797 which says something that could be viewed differently?

 

At this point, I would suggest that if anyone objects to “go down the list” they should email me saying they object, so that we can start the appeal process. For the future, I opened a “more clarification needed” errata.

 

-Rich Salz, 2022 NomCom Chair

 

[1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/OCPgpz9ryBNd2gwd-cHUjlw5GlE/