> -----Original Message----- > From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 3:29 AM > To: richard@xxxxxxxxxx > Cc: 'IETF-Discussion' > Subject: Re: Now there seems to be lack of communicaiton here... > > Richard Shockey wrote: > > > > > > This seems to be on the IETF NOMCOM web page but I do not see it in the > > ietf@xxxxxxxx archives. > > > > I suggest that given the unique importance of this NOMCOM cycle that a > > fuller explanation is in order. > > > > First .. the instant there was a problem the IETF community should have > been notified in full on this list. > > This message is on its way to the ietf-announce list; that takes time > with several thousand subscribers. That is the appropriate list, not > this one. Brian what in the world are you thinking? Given that the issue involved here is the integrity of the NOMCOM process, it deserves no more notification than a posting on the announce list? > > > > > Second ...a complete explanation of why this go screwed up should have > been posted to the community. > > The message seems to give a complete explanation. Oversights happen. We > are a volunteer community, and any of us can overlook something, any time. 'Seems' is a very mild word here. I do not believe there is any malice involved here only a severe lack of communication and consultation on an issue that essentially disqualifies the entire elector slate. > > > Third .. the IETF community AS A WHOLE should have been consulted as to > > possible remedies to this "problem" etc. Consultations to the IESG and > IAB > are not sufficient on matters of such gravity. > > Actually the custodian of the process is, as I read RFC 3777, the ISOC > President. There is a formal dispute procedure defined in RFC 3777, > but Andrew took remedial action before anyone invoked that. Since > remedial action has been taken, I don't see an issue at this time. Well I do. The suggestion that the selection process be respun is IMHO very very serious and the incorrect solution here. Why respin the entire list when it would have been just as easy to select the next elector on the list? IMHO options here should have been made clear before the decision was ultimately made. I don't dispute the NOMCOM's right to make the decision only that on a matter of such gravity input come from the community at large. This entire event has been very badly handled Brian. > > Richard Shockey > > Director, Member of the Technical Staff > > NeuStar > > 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 > > sip:rshockey(at)iptel.org > > sip:5651(at)neustarlab.biz > > PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 > > PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683 > > <mailto:richard(at)shockey.us> > > <mailto:richard.shockey(at)neustar.biz> _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf