>>>>> "John" == John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> writes:
John> And, if deciding which appeals are vexatious and which ones
John> are ok is too burdensome --especially relative to hearing a
John> few more appeals-- then, IMO, we shouldn't be spending time
John> on trying to figure out ways to make appeals harder.
I agree with you.
I think for several recent IESg appeals, there would be unanimous
support on the IESG for the proposition that considering the appeal
did not help the IETF or its processes.
In cases like that, it seems like having a fast track to get rid of
appeals is beneficial. The main question in my mind is what mechanism
we use to prevent the appealed body from abusing this mechanism.
I don't think fast track mechanisms are needed for appeals to WG
chairs or ADs. If the appeal is without merit, it takes the AD very
little time to write up a brief note denying the appeal.
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf