The question about the proposed relationship between moderators and the sergeant-at-arms is the interesting one to me. I can see the appeal of having a class of moderators without the formal responsibilities of the sergeant-at-arms but with an informal echo of authority, but I'm interested to know how the authority of the moderators will be established and maintained.
—james
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Pete Resnick <presnick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 7/22/14 1:07 PM, Michael StJohns wrote:I absolutely agree, with the caveat that "remonstrate" is probably a bit strong. I'd hope that that the moderator would be there to guide the discussion before remonstration is necessary.
Perhaps instead - "We're considering approaches to manage noise on the IETF list. One possibility discussed by the IESG is providing moderators to remonstrate with the noise producers prior to action by the sergeant-at-arms. The IESG would like to solicit comments on this and also solicit guidance on other possibilities prior to making any decision".
pr
--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478