--On Wednesday, 05 January, 2005 17:35 +0100 Harald Tveit
Alvestrand <harald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> So instead of:
>
>>>> The chair of the IAOC may be removed at any time by the
>>>> affirmative vote of two-thirds of the voting members of
>>>> the IAOC, or as a result of his or her departure from
>>>> the IAOC.
>
> we could say
>
> If the chair leaves the IAOC, or if two thirds of the
> voting IAOC members
> vote in favour of removing him, the term of the chair ends
> immediately.
>
> Better?
Harald,
Much better, but the language is uncomfortable. Let me suggest
a different change that I think accomplishes the same thing,
with more clarity.
(i) Change the earlier sentences...
The members of the IAOC shall select one of its
appointed voting members to serve as the chair of the
IAOC, with all of the duties and responsibilities
normally associated with such a position. The term of
the IAOC chair shall be one year, with no restriction on
renewal.
to read something more like
The members of the IAOC shall select one of its
appointed voting members to serve as the chair of the
IAOC, with all of the duties and responsibilities
normally associated with such a position. The term of
the IAOC chair shall be one year or for the duration of
that individual's tenure on the IAOC, whichever is less.
If reselected, an individual may serve multiple terms as
chair.
("no restriction on renewal" is not wrong, it is just
uncomfortably worded, since there is some ambiguity about what
"renewal" means.)
Then, replace the removal sentence with:
Independent of the specific term, the Chair serves at
the pleasure of the IAOC and may be removed from that
position at any time by two thirds vote of the voting
membership of the IAOC.
This avoids getting the term of office tangled up with an
exceptional removal procedure, which is more clear and, IMO,
just smoother text. It also clarifies the minor point that the
IAOC doesn't need to give reasons and conduct an impeachment/
recall proceeding to remove a Chair, which is, I think from
other discussions, what we intend.
This (and your suggested text, and the original) does leave
another loose end. If the IAOC removes a Chair part-way through
that one-year term and then selects a replacement, the
replacement will (pick one)
* Have a term equivalent to the remaining term of the
individual being replaced
* Have a term equivalent to the remaining term of the
individual being replaced plus one year.
* Have a one-year term.
This may not make a lot of difference except that the relevant
selecting body might be reluctant to retire a sitting Chair
(which might be either good or bad). But it probably should be
clarified with an extra sentence here.
And, FWIW, I still hate "all of the duties and responsibilities
normally associated with such a position" -- it is just too
open-ended and an invitation to arguments about what those are.
IMO, we would be better off saying nothing, just stopping that
sentence after the second occurrence of "IAOC" or, better yet,
just saying "...to serve as its chair."
john
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf