Re: Firing the IAOC (Re: Consensus search: #725 3.4b Appealing decisions)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



>>>>> "John" == John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> writes:

    John> --On Monday, January 17, 2005 2:34 PM +0100 Harald Tveit
    John> Alvestrand
    John> <harald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

    >> ...  The one thing that I agree sticks out is that the language
    >> of 3777 talks about firing *one* person - in the case where the
    >> group is dysfunctional, it may be better to take the group out,
    >> as you say.  ...

    John> I think this is the only significant issue.  The IAOC is
    John> either going to meet the needs of the community _as a group_
    John> or it isn't.  And, if it isn't, we should have a procedure
    John> for removing the whole crew.  Otherwise, we will find
    John> ourselves back in the position that the community has, sad
    John> to say, sometimes found itself in with the IESG: the
    John> disfunction is obvious, but it is extremely difficult to get
    John> sufficient information to blame and remove one person as the
    John> key to the issues.  
[. . . ]


    John> Basically, I think we have running code that this is an
    John> issue, and we need to develop a mechanism --other than
    John> recall and non-reappointment of individuals-- for dealing
    John> with it should it occur.  

In my experience this has not been an issue and I don't believe we
have evidence of that fact.  I do believe that group dynamics are
important and believe that throwing out the entire group is going to
be dangerous.  Without a strong demonstrated need, I believe that the
potential harm of such a procedure outweighs any potential good.

--Sam


_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]