At 02:19 01/02/2006, Sam Hartman wrote:
>>>>> "Harald" == Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no>
Harald> Sam, let me put it this way:
Harald> Changing the rules in the middle of the process is Just
Harald> Plain Stupid. We've done that too many times to count.
I am not sure I read this mail?
Anyway, this means a jurisprudence.
Under "Y" chairmanship.
At 03:13 01/02/2006, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
trying to avoid pointing at persons, despite the fact that a
specific person is at the heart of the current discussion...... your
3 points are very valid reasons for avoiding rule changes, but I
think you miss the point I was trying to make.
The IESG was asked to choose between two alternatives:
- Execute a PR-Action against "X"
- Do not execute a PR-Action against "X"
You right. This makes the first alternative.
The second alternative I asked for but not engaged yet is:
- Execute a PR-Action against "Y"
- Do not execute a PR-Action against "Y"
It will be based upon the time wasted since Nov 15th, 2005 in order
to delay the action decided during the Versailles meeting.
A PR-action, or a mailing list suspension, is NOT a punishment.
Rules of order exist to protect the IETF's ability to do its work.
I believe that's your central responsibility.
I need a clarification here. Do you mean that once you engaged a PR
defamaction, only Y can talk, and X should shut-up or this is a DoS
and prevents the IETF to carry its work?
Ietf mailing list