From: Theodore Ts'o [mailto:tytso(_at_)mit(_dot_)edu]
On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 06:00:18PM -0700, Nick Staff wrote:
2) Unless discussion of the decisions of the netiquette
committee,
during the committee is considering a request, and after the
committee has rendered a decision, is ruled out of scope,
it's not
going to help the very long discussions such as this one which
plague the IETF list.
In the worst case, we can assume that the mailing list
abuser will
immediately appeal any decision of the netiquette
committee, which
means that after inventing this entire mechanism, it may not have
any effect other than prolonging the agony.
I know personally, if I feel a process is fair, then even if I hate
the decision I can accept it and move on. That's another
reason why I
think it should be an unmanipulated membership.
That may be true for you, OK. But that's irrelevant. What
about someone who is mentally disturbed, or someone who is
determined to make a nuisance of himself? How long could
someone who is genuinely determined to carry out a DOS attack
on the IETF should be allowed to do so?
I am not necessarily making any claims about anybody in
parparticular, although I do have some private opinions on
this matter. The question is should we design a process
which is open to abuse in this manner?
It seems like designing a protocol with a known security hole
and assuming that all of the participants won't violate
societal norms an exploit said security hole. If this is
considered irresponsible when designing a protocol, should it
be considered irresponsible when designing organizational policies?
- Ted
Absolutely I agree Ted. I was just trying to express how it would effect me
as that's the only position I can (sometimes) speak authoritatively on.
Ultimately I don't see what you're suggesting that has any addition controls
- whether it's a committee or a single person the same appeal process can be
used and the same controls put in place. If you are referring to one of the
committee members being wacko I think I provided sufficient control for that
(as nothing requires unanimous vote and voting can be forced by majority).
If it's a nut job list participant then I guess I could call some old
friends in South Central Los Angeles to chop off their fingers but then
there's always speech recognition...I guess my question to you is please
tell me exactly what your concern is (if you want to do this off-list so we
don't annoy everyone that's cool with me) and I promise I will address them
and try to work with you to find an agreeable solution.
Best,
Nick
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf