On 10/23/12 8:51 PM, Eliot Lear wrote: > There are actually very few ITU rules, and very many guidelines. The > latter are the exact opposite of rigid, but subject to overturning by > Member States at any time. I had thought that we were roughly the same > in that regard, so as to avoid a perversity. We've had any number of > debates on this list about not creating process without a reason. > Fine. The price for that is that you have to deal with these sorts of > circumstances as and when they arise, using rough consensus as your guide. I was away from the IETF for several years and was surprised by the degree of ossification I found when I returned. I would very much like to see us find some way to restore some agility. That said, consensus-y processes scale poorly in cases where there's substantial disagreement. On the other hand, what I've seen so far in this discussion is two roughly sorted groups of responses: 1) "yes," and 2) "I am not comfortable with this process." There doesn't seem to be anybody saying "No" on the merits of the question, but concern that saying "yes" will violate some processes we've put in place. I am curious to know whether or not there are people who feel that Marshall shouldn't be considered to have quit IAOC. If there's nobody who feels that way I'm personally great with going ahead without a recall. If we've got basic agreement that Marshall needs to be replaced it seems to me that we're good to go ahead and do so. If we don't have agreement, then it's time to go through the process. Melinda