SM and others, See the IETF list for a response to what I think are the key parts of this message. john --On Saturday, June 15, 2024 02:59 -0700 S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Keith, > At 06:34 PM 14-06-2024, Keith Moore wrote: >> First of all I want to state that I also find the single cited >> message [1] clearly inappropriate and not consistent with the >> purpose of the IETF list. If by that message > > I agree with the above-mentioned description. I also agree with > the point which Yoav raised a few days ago. > > I may have to listen to the parties involved in a dispute before > making a determination in some other context. That is not how it > works in this context; the choice is between ratifying the decision > taken by IESG members or disagreeing with the decision. > > Let's assume that there was a comment about the characteristics of > a person in a working group. If I was handling the mailing list, I > would enable the moderation flag for the sender until further > notice. I would inform the sender about the action and what to > expect. There would also have to be a message to the working group > mailing list as per the requirement in the relevant process > document. -- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
