> From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On > > I'm interested to know whether people would see arguments for > either or both of > > 1. An IETF Ombudsman (or Ombudscommittee), to act as a > dispute mediator. > > 2. An IETF "netiquette" committee, to offload list banning > procedures from the IESG. > > Brian Ahh, you beat me to the punch ;) I'm a big fan of the netiquette committee. I'd like to suggest that volunteers be allowed to "throw their names into the hat" and that members be selected blindly from that pool. This would of course avoid any stacking or favoritism, but we would need a "qualifier" that prevented interlopers from submitting their name. Though I hate to suggest it as it would exclude me from selection, having attended an IETF meeting in the last x years could possibly be a good filter. I'm probably getting ahead of things but I was also thinking some controls could be implemented to discourage frivolous accusations. I realize that someone who repeatedly accuses falsely won't be taken seriously, but sometimes the goal is disruption and uncertainty which unfortunately these accusations are almost guaranteed to provide. Anyway I think it's a great idea Brian. nick _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf