Re: Recall petition for Mr. Marshall Eubanks

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

 



Sam,

On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:45 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:

> I offer my signature to the recall petition. I am nomcom eligible.
> 
> At this point, I believe the recall process is the correct process to
> follow unless there is an approved BCP update.
> In a case where there's been no contact and there's an argument we've
> found a gap in the procedures I can see the argument for creativity.
> However, according to Bob's note, Marshall has been contacted and rather
> than resigning, said he would consider resigning.
> I hope he does.
> Until he does, though, by considering resigning rather than resigning,
> he has implied that there might be a reason not to resign.
> In my mind that moves us out of a situation where creative
> interpretations of vacancy are appropriate.
> I think we're now in a position where there's a legitimate disagreement
> between Marshall and some members of the community about whether
> Marshall ought to be in his position.
> I believe the recall process is the only existing tool we have for
> resolving such a disagreement; I think permitting the IAOC to invent a
> process for resolving such a disagreement without an approved BCP is
> entirely inappropriate.
> 
> Again, I hope this can all be side stepped by a resignation.


While the IAOC has not discussed this formally, I agree with you.  The situation did change when we were able to talk with Marshall.

I too hope he will resign.

Bob





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]