Eric Rescorla wrote: > Regardless of what the IETF's global policy is and without taking a > position on Dean Anderson's postings in general, I am not aware of him > having abused these services to send any inappropriate mail to me. > I therefore see no good reason to block what is otherwise a useful > communication channel. Accordingly, I hereby request that you unblock > his posting privileges to any and all of the above mentioned aliases > that send mail to me. +1 and a similar request from me. I'm not generally in favor of restrictions on speech as long as I remain free not to listen. In that respect, Dean Anderson has never abused his freedom to speak to me. /Larry Lawrence Rosen Rosenlaw & Einschlag, a technology law firm (www.rosenlaw.com) 3001 King Ranch Road, Ukiah, CA 95482 707-485-1242 * cell: 707-478-8932 * fax: 707-485-1243 Skype: LawrenceRosen > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > Eric Rescorla > Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 10:18 AM > To: Henrik Levkowetz > Cc: IETF Discussion; iesg@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Extending the Dean Anderson PR-action to lists on > tools.ietf.org > > > Hi Henrik, > > Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > > As a service to the community, there are two sets of email address alias > > lists maintaned on tools.ietf.org: > > > > One list provides aliases for the WG chairs of all active working groups > > and also of chairs of working groups which have been closed recently, > and > > also equivalent aliases for working group ADs, patterned so: > > <wg-acronym>-chairs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx and <wg-acronym>-ads@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > Another list provides aliases for draft authors, so that they can be > > reached through aliases following the pattern <draft- > name>@tools.ietf.org. > > > > The service is described briefly on http://tools.ietf.org/ under the > > "Share and Communicate" heading. > > First, I want to say that this is a great service. I do a fair number of > reviews and I use these aliases all the time... It's really become a > critical part of our infrastructure. > > > > As maintainer of these lists, I, Henrik Levkowetz, hereby let it be > known > > that I have chosen to extend the posting rights action against Dean > Anderson > > (see http://www4.ietf.org/iesg/pr-action.html) to also apply to these > lists, > > according to the provisions for posting rights actions described on the > above > > referenced web page and the references it mentions. > > While this may be technically within the limits of 3683, I don't think > it comports well with the spirit of the document. To recap, the effect > of a PR-Action is that: > > o those identified on the PR-action have their posting rights to > that IETF mailing list removed; and, > > o maintainers of any IETF mailing list may, at their discretion, > also remove posting rights to that IETF mailing list. > > >From the rest of the context of the document, I think it's reasonably > clear that the purpose of allowing maintainers of other mailing lists > to remove posting rights is to allow them to quickly respond to > disruptive behavior *on those lists*. In the case of WG or other > discussion lists, this is a reasonably good fit: the > maintainer of the list is generally the chair and so is responsible > for monitoring and facilitating discussion and is well position > to determine whether the subject of a PR action is disruptive. > > However, this is not really the case for these lists, which are just > expanders for the relevant chairs, ADs, or draft authors. While you > may be maintaining the list in a technical sense, the recipients are > the ones who monitor the communication and are in a position to > determine whether it's disruptive or not. I don't think it fits well > with the intent of 3683 to have a global decision to be taken on all > these services by someone who is not involved in the discussion, > regardless of whether those involved have complained. I'm not saying > that PR Actions can't be extended to these aliases (though I think > that given Sam's comments it's an open question and given the ease of > expanding them directly it seems rather pointless) but in my opinion > at minimum it should be upon request of the recipients, not the > decision of a global maintainer. > > Regardless of what the IETF's global policy is and without taking a > position on Dean Anderson's postings in general, I am not aware of him > having abused these services to send any inappropriate mail to me. > I therefore see no good reason to block what is otherwise a useful > communication channel. Accordingly, I hereby request that you unblock > his posting privileges to any and all of the above mentioned aliases > that send mail to me. > > Best, > -Ekr > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf