Inline
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Elz" <kre(_at_)munnari(_dot_)OZ(_dot_)AU>
To: "IETF" <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Cc: <iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2010 1:57 PM
Subject: Re: Last Call: Policy Statement on the Day Pass Experiment
Date: Thu, 06 May 2010 18:07:40 -0400
From: The IESG <iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Message-ID: <4BE33DAC(_dot_)80803(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
| The IESG is considering the following Statement on the Day Pass
| Experiment. The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks on
| a policy statement, and the IESG actively solicits comments on this
| action.
I have two (different types of) comments to make. First, and most
important by far, is WTF ??? I understand the need for IESG "Statements"
from time to time, but the very worst thing to possibly to be making such
statements about is the process by which the IESG (and more of course) is
selected - if there was anything about which there's an obvious and clear
conflict of interest, it is this.
But be fair: they are doing an IETF Last Call BEFORE they decide on the
statement.
Is that not how you try to determine consensus within the whole IETF?
Bert
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf