Hi John, On 9/9/12 8:43 PM, John Levine wrote: > Let's say I write to the IESG and say this: > > Due to a late night editing error, draft-foo-bar-42 which I > submitted yesterday contains several paragraphs of company > confidential information which you can easily see are irrelevant to > the draft. My boss wants it taken down pronto, even though he > realizes that third parties may have made copies of it in the > meantime. I will probably lose my job if it stays up for more than a > few days. Thanks for your consideration. > > Is this the response? > > You didn't make any legal threats, and now that we know the > situation, we wouldn't believe any legal threats you might make in the > future, so you better check out those burger flipping opportunities. No, the response is that we refer you to our policy. As an open organization we do not remove information once posted, except under extraordinary circumstances. > > What was wrong with the original version which gave the IESG the > latitude to remove an I-D if they feel, for whatever reason, that it > would be a good idea to do so? What original? The draft policy states: > An I-D will only be removed from the public I-D archive in compliance > with a duly authorized court order. > If the IESG were so screwed up that > they started deleting I-Ds for bad reasons, no amount of process > verbiage would help. Certainly, but let's not start from the wrong place to begin with. Let's also set expectations that the IESG may be used to clean up after other peoples' messes. They have enough to do. And again, this is best developed with counsel. Regards, Eliot