On Aug 27, 2013, at 1:20 PM, Scott Brim <scott(_dot_)brim(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
wrote:
IMHO that's not a job for the sergeant at arms. The SAA is responsible for
how things are said. The shepherd -- or supershepherd or whatever -- would
be responsible for the substance.
I think it should be fairly obvious even to one not practiced in the art that a
lot of the postings to the ietf mailing list recently have been simple repeats
of points previously made, with no additional substance, which, well
intentioned or not, purely have the effect of making it harder to evaluate
consensus. But sure, the responsible AD could also intervene.