Re: Extending the Dean Anderson PR-action to lists on tools.ietf.org

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

 



More to the point, the guideline in RFC 3683 is:

   A PR-action identifies one or more individuals, citing messages
   posted by those individuals to an IETF mailing list, that appear to
be abusive of the consensus-driven process. If approved by the IESG,
   then:

   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.

Henk is applying the second bullet of the guideline and is, per the RFC, within his rights in doing so.

With respect to rai-ads@tools and similar lists, I can see it two ways. I should imagine that Dean could send mail directly to Cull at his Cisco email address, where only Cisco's and Cullen's filters are relevant, so there is not an argument that "Dean really needs access to rai-ads@". But unless Cullen sees an issue with posting to that list, it also doesn't solve a problem that anyone has (unless Henk has a problem as administrator). I see the second bullet as addressing the case where someone is a pain on some list such as the IDN list and migrates the problem to another list; if he has been banned from one, the administrator of the second has everything he needs to make that change. But that doesn't really apply in this case.

So I would ask what problem blocking access to lists at tools.ietf.org is solving, and if there is none, would argue in favor of a "principle of least mechanism"; there is no value in making someone go away from a place that he is not.

My two yen.

On Apr 17, 2009, at 8:32 AM, Samuel Weiler wrote:

On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Cullen Jennings wrote:

I really don't understand why Dean should be blocked from rai-ads@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx .

Dean is the subject of a PR Action; Henrik needs no other reason to apply the blocking and, if there is a reason or triggering event (which seems likely), he needn't disclose it to Dean or to this list.

In the general case, I also see no harm in the blocking: those aliases are for convenience, and it's easy to expand them using public sources. Blocking their use doesn't meaingfully hamper IETF participation.

-- Sam
_______________________________________________

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

_______________________________________________

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]