At 22:23 02/10/2005, Dean Anderson wrote:
But I think that Jefsey should formally counter-complain that the
PR-action is a personal attack based on personal dislike.
Dear Dean,
Harald over did it: too much is nothing.
I only needed to expose the personal bias of some of the signatories
over a technical and key strategic aspect for the IETF and the future
of the Internet. Harald's threat was enough for that: I said it and
acted accordingly. But he was bound to publish this ad-hominem
(obviously in hurry if you read the mail selection and its comments)
after apologising to the "consensus" (of another SSDO?) for honestly
comforting ... this point of mine (private use usage, i.e. exclusiveness).
The only real matter of interest for the IETF is to take advantage
from this incident to prevent further biased moral lynching attempts.
IMHO the solution could be a "closed LC".
1. someone calls for a PR-action to the Sergeant at Arms who decides
if the request is ethically acceptable or not.
2. the case is then transmitted to the IESG which opens a 15 days
Last Call, any public comment resulting in a PR removal for one month.
3. a summary is made by the IESG or the initiator and sent to the
concerned participant for comments before 15 days. An AD may be
assigned to help the defense.
4. The IETF decides on these summary and response.
jfc
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf