Dear Joel,
I am afraid you rebuild the rules while I respect them. A WG Chair is
not God the Father. In its wisdom the IETF has devised an appeal
mechanism. I oppose positions of a WG-Chair and of a Mailing List
Owner. So, I use and respect that mechanism. I always respected its
decisions. All my action is precisely to force these decisions when
they are missing, so we can respect them. Do you deny me that right?
The current action against me seems to have been launched to
interferes with a peaceful consideration of two long time annouced
appeals, one now with the IESG over RFC 3066 Bis; and one with the
IAB, over the ethic and usage impact and the documentation of the
Multilingual Internet. Amusingly removing or limiting my rights of
appeal was one of the first propositions. The IETF would lose every
technical credibility. It would become the publisher of the bigger.
As you say, I said the involved questions are important enough to
call for a decision by the IAB in the technical areas, and of the
other appropriate appeal entities in the areas of applications. Do
you object that too? The IAB Chair has indicated the IAB will
respond. The IESG works on the other very seriously as far as I know,
from the questions they ask. These appeals and my responses not only
fully state that I will respect the final IAB (IESG) decisions, but
explain how.
I suggest that you do as Marshall. Consult the archives and read the
appeals. Then speak the thruth. I am supposed to be out off-topic in
an engineering group? Show me off-topic! My positions are documented
by two technical documents on the IAB and the IESG sites and are
seriously considered. Yet I have not heard a ***_single_ ***
technical objection. Should not the first question, even before my
liberty of speach, be if I am right?
http://iab.org/appeals/2006-01-04-jefsey-appeal.pdf
http://ietf.org/IESG/APPEALS/jefsey-morfin-appeal.txt
We are not here to waste time in childish disputes. Should I appeal
the IESG against my last ietf-languages@xxxxxxxxxxxxx last ban?
SHould I question the COI of some IESG Members? We are to document
the best solutions for the Internet designers, users and managers. I
do not feel that this thread remembers that.
All the best
jfc
At 03:17 24/01/2006, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
Assuming I have properly understood Mr. Morfin's email, the best
argument I have seen for permitting all IETF email list
adminsitrators to ban him as they deem necessary is his own
description of his behavior.
Mr. Morfin appears to have stated that if he feels an opinion is
important he will push for it (as he should.) He has also indicated
that he will keep pushing for it on any and all mailing lists even
after the working group chair has determined that a rough consensus exists.
If I have understood his postings in this discussion correctly, Mr.
Morfin has specifically indicated that he intends to behave in ways
that are not in accord with the rules. It seems to me that the
sensible response to a notice of intended misbehavior is to be
prepared to respond immediately and directly to such behavior.
The proposed action specifically gives the list managers / chairs
that necessary authority in the light of Mr. Morfin's exhibited and
asserted behavior.
Yours,
Joel M. Halpern
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf