On Feb 19, 2017, at 2:07 AM, S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:And this is why the IETF community shouldn't treat charter updates as pro forma. Charter review is an important part of the feedback mechanism that keeps the IETF a consensus-driven organization. Doing out-of-charter work, or lawyering the charter to say that work that really isn't part of the intent of the charter nevertheless conforms to the letter of the charter, bypasses this important step.
Describing the process issue as "lawyering" conveys the idea that it is unreasonable to complain about such issues. I agree with what you wrote about the feedback mechanism.
By lawyering, I mean the practice of trying to fit more in the charter than those who participated in writing that charter intended for it to cover. This is a very fine line: there are definitely cases where one can legitimately debate what the actual intention expressed in the charter is. For this reason I think it's best for ADs to err on the side of caution and update the charter if an AD thinks they might be at the edge.
|