Ohta-san, On Sun, Sep 01, 2019 at 05:25:21PM +0900, Masataka Ohta wrote: > Michael StJohns wrote: > > > The SAA MUST NOT be used as a tool, or even be perceived as being > > used as a tool to stymie dissent, or to stop or steer discussions > > that might be uncomfortable to the SAA or I*. > Considering that "sergeant-at-arms appointed by the Chair" [rfc3005] > and "Complaints regarding their decisions should be referred to the > IAB" [rfc3005], which means SAAs are loyal to I*, its practically > impossible, which is why SAAs power must be strictly limited as is > described by rfc3005. > > As such, I was surprised to have received a mail recently from an > SAA saying: > > We understand that this style of communication was accepted (if > not encouraged) in the past, but it is no longer the expectation > now. > > As criticizing a draft without reading the draft is the worst > possible "unprofessional commentary" [rfc3005], it is established > manner of IETF to dismiss a person who repeatedly behave so by > saying "read the draft" with quotations from relevant part of the > draft. > > Or, do I misunderstand something? I do not want to get into the details of the matter in public without your permission, but I do want to reassure you (and everyone else) that the "style of communication" in question was not in relation to quoting exerpts from a document and asking someone to go read the document, who has not already done so. We remain happy to have a more-in-depth discussion about the particulars, at your convenience. Thanks, Ben for the Sergeant-at-Arms
