On 10/23/12 8:51 PM, Eliot Lear wrote:
There are actually very few ITU rules, and very many guidelines. The
latter are the exact opposite of rigid, but subject to overturning by
Member States at any time. I had thought that we were roughly the same
in that regard, so as to avoid a perversity. We've had any number of
debates on this list about not creating process without a reason.
Fine. The price for that is that you have to deal with these sorts of
circumstances as and when they arise, using rough consensus as your guide.
I was away from the IETF for several years and was surprised by the
degree of ossification I found when I returned. I would very much
like to see us find some way to restore some agility. That said,
consensus-y processes scale poorly in cases where there's substantial
disagreement. On the other hand, what I've seen so far in this
discussion is two roughly sorted groups of responses: 1) "yes," and
2) "I am not comfortable with this process." There doesn't seem to
be anybody saying "No" on the merits of the question, but concern
that saying "yes" will violate some processes we've put in place.
I am curious to know whether or not there are people who feel that
Marshall shouldn't be considered to have quit IAOC. If there's
nobody who feels that way I'm personally great with going ahead
without a recall. If we've got basic agreement that Marshall
needs to be replaced it seems to me that we're good to go ahead and
do so. If we don't have agreement, then it's time to go through the
process.
Melinda