On Wed, 24 Oct 2012, John Levine wrote: > >I agree with you that removing him would be the simplest approach, but I > >can see possible situations where NOT following the process could lead > >us into legal trouble. > > Anyone can sue in the US for any reason, but this is silly. > > The IAOC made extensive attempts to contact him in many ways, with > zero response. No court I know would find it unreasonable to assume > that he's no longer interested. The legal issue raised by a previous reply that resonates with me is that someone unsatisfied with a business decision by the adjusted IAOC membership could sue based on documented process not being followed to appoint the membership. > I certainly hope that this sort of situation does not recur, but it > seems perfectly reasonable in view of the facts to let the IAOC > proceed as though he's resigned. Yeah, except establishing new process and applying it retroactively could be an issue. A new removal process could be defined and accepted by the IETF's normal process, but the clock would have to start with approval of the new process.