First in regards to Bob's post a bit ago, I personally am not asserting that the IAOC has broken any rules. I was sincere in my applause for their requesting feedback on this question; in spite of the fact that I disagree with their premise. On 10/23/2012 2:32 PM, John Leslie wrote: > Doug Barton <dougb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> You asked for feedback, you have now received a non-trivial number of >> responses saying that arbitrarily declaring the position vacant is not >> an appropriate action. You have also received volunteers for the recall >> process. Rather than spending more time on trying to justify declaring >> the position vacant, why not get started on that recall? > > I strongly urge folks who think as Doug does to _read_ RFC 3777. I watched the castle being built, I've no desire to live in it. :) I did do a quick review of it just now, and at the risk of repeating myself I think anyone who is interested in revamping it would be putting their efforts to excellent use. > Note that the recall process can only start with 20 "members of the > IETF community, who are qualified to be voting members of a nominating > committee" petitioning to the Internet Society President. > > If that happens, the recall process will start; if not, it won't. How very tautological of you. :) [snip] > Myself, I don't expect to petition or volunteer to serve on a > recall committee. The recall process isn't intended to be "practical", > IMHO, and seems intended only to prod the subject of recall to resign. > In other organizations, I have lived through longish periods of > uncertainty about the exact status of an individual, and I no longer > find it scary. I tend to agree, which is one of the reasons I think the procedure should be followed as written. Doug