On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 02:28:17AM -0400, Joel M. Halpern wrote: > Reading the discussion of the SAA, I wonder if part of the confusion here is > the difference between the SAA managing (and working to control and prevent) > seriously inappropriate conduct as defined by 3005, and the general role of > a lsit owner to keep the list on topic and ensure that discussions are moved > to where they are most effective. > > As a hypothetical, if instead of the SAA as SAA ssending the "suggestion", > Alissa had sent a note calling attention to the fact that the underlying > message had requested comments to rfc-interest, and asked if the discussion > could be moved there, would that have been seen as less inappropriate? Even > if one then chose (as I expect folks would have) to suggest that such a move > was the wrong answer? This is my memory of the division of labor used when I served as SAA many years ago. The serving IETF chair would make suggestions to try to redirect move discussions to other mailing lists. It would be EXTREMELY rare that the SAA "big stick" of the form, "sit down, shut up, or I'll cut off your posting privileges" would be used to manage where a discussion would take place. I think I can remember a single time when that might have been taken place, and in that time, the person in question was engaging in many other behaviors which were much more blatently deserving of SAA attention, and the posting restriction was done after much provocation, and not just because a discussion was taking on the wrong list by the ITEF chair's lights. - Ted
