Harald,
It seems that you haven't quite followed the thread, or read the messages.
This issue was brought up in a comparison between Nanog and the IETF by
Fred Baker, who apparently found little difference between the IETF and
Nanog. It is quite valid to make comparisions to the missions of other
organizations, so he brings up a valid point, which deserves equally valid
disagreement.
The events involving Susan Harris occurred, and I am reporting them to
distinguish the IETF from Nanog in response to a post comparing the IETF
to NANOG. Many people no doubt think her conduct was improper. Reporting
improper conduct is not a personal attack. The act I am criticizing was
made in her official role at Nanog, and reflects on Nanog as an
organization. This was not a private or personal act. It has nothing to
do with her personally except that she is a person responsible for Nanog,
and has authority at Nanog, and she made the decsisions which are being
criticized. Her official decisions reflect on Nanog just as your official
decisions reflect on the IETF. If you make bad decisions, they will
reflect badly on the IETF, and you and the IETF will deserve criticism.
Such criticism is not a personal attack. You are misusing the term.
Susan Harris may be an nice person. I've never met her in person. I don't
know anything personal about her to attack. But sometimes nice people
behave in ways that are quite obviously improper. Documenting, reporting,
criticizing, and complaining about such behavior is not a personal attack.
For your information and reference, a 'personal attack' is where one
attacks a personal trait of the person, rather than their position. I've
attacked her position as represented by her official decisions regarding
Nanog, not her personally.
Sometimes people try to deflect criticism by trying to call it a personal
attack. This in not the first time that people have misused the term
'personal attack' when their friends were being criticized. Perhaps you
are letting your friendship get in the way?
Quite obviously, I can't take it to Nanog--apparently you didn't read my
message. Certainly you wouldn't make such a frivolous statement if you
had read it. But your suggestion clarifies and obvious difference between
Nanog and the IETF: there is no one in authority other than Susan
Harris--there is no one to appeal her decisions to. IETF decisions, as
you know, can be appealed.
But she also did some things that are relevant to the IETF. Besides
halting my participation in Nanog, she also halted my participation in the
RADB. At the time, Av8 was participating in the RADB and had RADB objects.
It seems to me that denying my participation in the RADB may be a
violation of IETF/ISOC/ICANN rules. And this should be redressed.
Thanks,
Dean Anderson
CEO
Av8 Internet, Inc
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
Dean,
the subject of the IETF mission is not particularly relevant to bashing
NANOG policies, or personal attacks on persons for their activities within
NANOG.
Nor are personal attacks appropriate on the IETF list.
If you want to quarrel about NANOG topics, at least change the subject.
Or better yet, take it to NANOG.
--On 30. januar 2004 11:46 -0500 Dean Anderson <dean(_at_)av8(_dot_)com>
wrote:
So Nanog is quite a bit different from the IETF, and, in my opinion,
should not be associated with or compared to the IETF. Actually being
right on concrete issues is something that carries no weight with Nanog,
but it does carry weight with the IETF.