The process issues I am raising are fixable. People need to be aware of
the issues and communicate better. We need to think of ways to force
transparency and remove the bad apples from positions of power as soon
as possible: If a lot of people feel that an AD or an IAB member is not
following process, biased or otherwise incompetent, well then, as
painful as it might be, we need to put the recall process to test.
There is no need to wait until the regular nomcom cycle.
Next, I know a number of people at the IETF who care about our
principles, are passionate about following them and who argue for them,
sometimes at the cost of their careers at their places of employment.
Those are the "IETF."
Finally, whereas I may have examples where things could be better or
where I was unable to get some things done at the IETF, I am raising
these issues independent of any one particular issue or problem. What I
am learning in the process is that some look at all of this from an
"idealistic" viewpoint and think that everything is fine and a few who
think that drastic measures are needed. I am of the view point that we
need more transparency and that we need to introduce more checks and
balances on ADs and IAB members in how they exercise their power. Many
of us will be at the losing end of arguments and that may have serious
implications in the real world; but, as long as the process is fair and
open, and the rules are followed, we should all be able to deal with
being at the losing end of arguments.
I am optimistic that we can make the process fair and open.
Ietf mailing list