I don't think it is a showstopper and don't think that removing the
IAOC char should require a super majority. If the chair serves at the
pleasure of the IAOC then the chair should be easily replaceable by the
IAOC. I do agree, however, that it should take a majority of the
members and not a majority of those present at a meeting to remove the
chair.
a.
On 28 jan 2005, at 04.10, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
Russ raised the issue that 2/3 majority to remove an IAOC chair seems
a bit excessive, considering that this requires 6 votes out of 8, with
the chair being one of the 8. So the chair + 2 others could hold on to
the chair position.
Scott mentioned that removing a chair is serious, so we should make
sure we don't get into the "decision at a meeting with few people
present" problem, and talked about email voting.
Suggested change:
Old text (from section 4):
The Chair serves at the pleasure of the IAOC, and may be removed from
that position at any time by a two thirds vote of the voting
membership of the IAOC.
New text:
The Chair serves at the pleasure of the IAOC, and may be removed from
that position at any time by a vote of five of the IAOC voting
members.
If people disagree with Russ, and think that we SHOULD require six
votes, that's easily accomplished:
The Chair serves at the pleasure of the IAOC, and may be removed from
that position at any time by a vote of six of the IAOC voting
members.
I don't think that this is a show-stopper issue no matter what the
resolution is, but it's nice to have it nailed.
Harald
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf