Re: Last Call: <draft-farrresnickel-harassment-05.txt> (IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures) to Best Current Practice

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

 



Sam,

On Mar 12, 2015 9:34 AM, "Jari Arkko" <jari.arkko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Sam,
>
> Cutting to the 2nd item, i.e., what effect the ombudsteam might have on leadership.
>
> I understand your concern Sam. Do you have a suggestion on how that should be addressed? As an aside, I think we all agree that leadership that misbehaves needs to be removed. The debate is about the mechanics - whether those indirect through effects of action from the ombudsteam, indirect via their recommendation, or more direct.

I just wanted to confirm that the IESG talked about the "recommendation to remove" seriously, and IIRC, we couldn't figure out WHO the Ombudsteam would make a recommendation to, much less what they might say.

It seemed cleaner to me, to say "the community already has an IETF-consensus way to remove anyone in I-star leadership using a recall, why not use that, instead of coming up with some other mechanism after IETF Last Call?"

I am open to the possibility that this was the wrong answer. I've been wrong before.

I look forward to understanding what people think better than I do today.

Spencer


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