There are several flaws in RFC 3934 's Suspension Processes require Notice when a Suspension is Lifted.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




----- Original Message ----- From: "TS Glassey" <tglassey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <iesg@xxxxxxxx>; <ipr-wg@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: <chair@xxxxxxxx>; "Contreras, Jorge" <Jorge.Contreras@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 8:09 AM
Subject: Suspension Processes require Notice when a Suspension is Lifted.


Folks -
when the IETF lifts a Suspension just doing it and neglecting to announce that the individual who was suspended is an act which can only be reviewed as 'an attempt by the WG Chair to keep that person off that list' and in doing so, and one would think that this opens the Sponsor's and the IETF itself to more pain.

This is true since suspensions are announced on the list itself.



--- snip ---

In summary, if the IETF notices the party who is suspended when posting rights are removed then they MUST notice as well when the rights are restored. Nothing else is ethical or reasonable...

Also when an appeal is acted on, someone needs to say something to the person who filed that appeal.

The purpose here is disclosure...


Right? - so who is that and when is it said?

We need both of these flow-issues addressed in that process.


---
Personal Disclaimers Apply

TS Glassey

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]