This was offlist, but I think it is relevant, now to similar questions raised by others. I will put the original messages at http://www.av8.net/IETF-watch/Tytso.html I will try to have this done tonight. Offlist, Ted has said he has no recollection of me. Indeed, I did not meet him. I wasn't sure if he had some personal animosity at an ancient romance lost. I have sent him the name of the girl I think we may have both dated. If he denies dating her, or denies having any animosity because of it, then I know of no personal animous, so his inability to properly summarize my argument must be a mistake on his part resulting from some reason other than personal animosity. -- Av8 Internet Prepared to pay a premium for better service? www.av8.net faster, more reliable, better service 617 344 9000 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 19:50:38 -0400 (EDT) From: Dean Anderson <dean@xxxxxxx> To: Dave Singer <singer@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx>, Nick Staff <nick.staff@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Brian E Carpenter <brc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: delegating (portions of) ietf list disciplinary process On Wed, 28 Sep 2005, Dave Singer wrote: > Good grief! I am (mostly) a lurker on this list, and I know none of > the people involved in this subject so far, and have (to the best of > my knowledge) not shared a mailing list with them. > > Here you bring in a matter that is unrelated to the dispute at hand, > in a way that makes direct, personal attacks on a specific > individual, without providing substantiation. It is related to the subject matter of this thread. This thread is different from the DNSOP Mismanagement thread. Perhaps you are confused about that. You seem to confuse "personal attack" with specific professional criticism. If you mean that you cannot evaluate my accusation without the original messages, that is an entirely fair request. I will make them available so that they can be evaluated by others and so that my accusation can be fully verified. > "professionally dishonest" is a grave accusation. Indeed it is. I don't make it lightly. The issue involved is not limited to just the specific criticism of Mr. Ts'o. The IETF Chair doesn't seem to consider professional honesty important in IETF officers. Bad leadership starts at the top, as does good leadership. The failure to act on verifiable accusation of professional dishonesty is also itself a criticism to which the IETF Chair can be held accountable. The IETF Chair has had both the original messages and the accusation for far longer than you've known about it. > I assume from reading the email that this is unrelated to the DNSOP subject > under discussion. The current thread subject "Re: delegating (portions of) ietf list disciplinary process", did in fact arise out of discussion of the diciplinary questions raised on DNSOP Mismanagement discussion. But it is now a separate discussion with its own subject description, and has its own issues that are related to disciplinary process in general, not just the particular one under the DNSOP Mismanagement subject. The failure of the IETF Chair to discipline the Sergeant at Arms is an example of a critical and high level failure of disciplinary process. > I doubt that this new accusation needs to be discussed > on the IETF list along with the original subject, and so you have > left those accused in the unpalatable position of either letting the > accusation stand, or propagating a discussion that did not previously > and probably should not exist on the list. _I_ have left no one in an unpalatable position. Mr Ts'o is responsible for his own actions. He has left himself in an unpalatable position. And Mr. Ts'o also has a copy of the messages, if he chooses to dispute my accusation. I have not made vague charges that aren't specific enough to be disputed, if that's what you mean. This accusation can certainly be discussed under the current subject on 'ietf list disciplinary process'. I included enough to make specific my accusations; My accusations are not vague. The IETF Chair has Ts'o's original messages, and as well as my offlist complaint that they failed to act on. And as I said above, if you mean that you cannot evaluate my accusation without the original messages, that is an entirely fair request. I will make them available so that they can be evaluated by others and so that my accusation can be fully verified. > Can you think of a courteous way to resolve this for the community? Yes, I can. The IETF (and ISOC) leadership can start holding IETF officers accountable for professional honesty. That is a critical first step to honest and fair disciplinary processes. Working down from the top officers, eventually everyone including the WG chairs can be held accountable to a discipline of upholding IETF rules, policies, and acting in the IETF interests. And finally, participants can be fairly and honestly held to the IETF and ISOC codes of conduct. > I have not sent this to the list, precisely to avoid such propagation. Propogation of what? > You'll note that I have no position on the virtues of either this new > argument or the original one about suspension of posting privileges. I got the impression that you felt this new discussion had no virtue. > At 2:55 -0400 28/09/05, Dean Anderson wrote: > >This isn't going to work, with ordinary members. > > > >But Ts'o makes good points. You can't know easily who is trustworthy. Though > >you can know sometimes who is not trustworthy. > > > >I've seen a number of people in the leadership act inappropriately. > >Offlist, Ted > >Ts'o, in his official role as Sargeant at Arms, was recently professionally > >dishonest ... > > -- Av8 Internet Prepared to pay a premium for better service? www.av8.net faster, more reliable, better service 617 344 9000 _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf