OK, I am open to the idea. And I suppose that the current appeal
mechanisms would allow it.
But in that case I do have a problem with making the barrier higher for
appeals originating from a non IOAC member. While I can see arguments
for not removing an IAOC's member's right of appeal, I don't see any
arguments that should give them any greater right of appeal. I.e. I
would have difficulty supporting a mechanism that weighed 1 IAOC member
versus 10 non members as suggested in your original message.
Allow appeals to be made but set some bar for an appeal; perhaps
appeals from IAOC members are always accepted, but appeals from the
community require say 10 signatures.
a.
On 3 dec 2004, at 22.44, Sam Hartman wrote:
"avri" == avri <avri(_at_)psg(_dot_)com> writes:
avri> And I don't think we want to get into a situation where we
avri> have one member of the IAOC appealing the actions of the
avri> IAOC.
I do. Or rather in cases where that happens, I'd treat the appeal
very seriously. Being reasonable is one of the criteria we use for
selecting our leadership. If that leadership still feels a decision
is worth appealing even knowing the consequences and pain of such an
appeal, then I'm very interested in what they have to say.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf