Hi John,
I think I understand what you are saying, and I certainly wouldn't object to
some more explicit limitations on this experiment.
However the current draft does explicitly say that no suspensions can extend
past the end of this experimental period (18-months from when it starts), so
there is an explicit limitations that I decided that I could live with. Do
you think we need more?
Margaret
-----Original Message-----
From: John Leslie [mailto:john(_at_)jlc(_dot_)net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 3:36 PM
To: Sam Hartman
Cc: iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Last Call: 'Experimental Procedure for Long Term
Suspensionsfrom Mailing Lists' to Experimental RFC
Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf(_at_)mit(_dot_)edu> wrote:
To: John Leslie <john(_at_)jlc(_dot_)net>
John, does the text I proposed to address Margaret's
concern (making
it clear that this will not become a permanent BCP), plus
the review
requirements proposed by Harald, plus the work started by Brian to
build community consensus on a new set of mailing list
procedures help
address your concerns?
Making it clear that this will be a short-term experiment
helps a lot.
To _very_ briefly recap my comments at:
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg41057.html
I worry about the political pressures to "try" something
even more extreme than BCP83. Though I am willing to trust
current IESG members to instead find something less extreme
(but greater than a 30-day suspension), I fear that some
rather strong voices will be raised in support of
"suspensions" which are _more_ permanent than BCP83 and
require less process.
I trust current IESG members to "just say No" right now;
but these pressures _will_ continue. Thus, I want to minimize
the period during which IESG members will be subjected to them.
Ideally, the experiment would be written to only authorize
trials of procedures _less_ extreme than BCP83. We're close to that:
]
] The result of these guidelines is that there is a large gap
between ] the levels of sanction that can be applied. An
individual can be ] suspended from a working group list
easily for 30 days. However the ] only option available to
the IESG that permits a longer suspension ] for any list
besides ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org is the ability to suspend an ]
individual for an indefinite time period from one list. This
] suspension can expand to any IETF list without community or
IESG ] involvement. This memo is an RFC 3933[RFC3933]
experiment to provide ] the IESG with the ability to create
additional mechanisms to manage ] IETF mailing lists while
the community decides what mailing list ] guidelines are
appropriate. IN particular this experiment allows the ] IESG
to create a level of sanction between RFC 3934 and RFC 3683
for ] working group lists and create sanctions other than
RFC 3683 for ] non-working-group lists. The goal of this
experiment is to improve ] the functioning of IETF mailing
lists while keeping the process open ] and fair.
... which states "in particular this experiment allows"
something in between; but it doesn't in any way limit it to that.
IMHO, the IESG would face an easier task if this proposal
_did_ limit it to that. Please note, however, that this is
merely my opinion; and I'm not the one that will have to face
the political pressure for procedures _more_ extreme than
BCP83. Thus, I in no sense wish to stand in the way of
adopting it as currently drafted.
--
John Leslie <john(_at_)jlc(_dot_)net>
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf