Speaking only for myself:
On 3/13/15 12:34 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
old:
(The Ombudsteam can not impose that a Respondent
who is in a IETF management position be removed from that
position. There are existing mechanisms within IETF process for
the removal of people from IETF management positions that may be
used as necessary.)
new:
The Ombudsteam MAY ask a respondent to consider resigning from an IETF
management position. The Ombudsteam May remove a respondent from a
working group or document editor position. While this document does
not create additional procedures permitting a nomcom appointee be
removed, the Ombudsteam can exclude a respondent from meetings and
mailing lists and other activities, making it impossible for them to
carry out their appointed tasks.
- With regard to NomCom appointed positions, this is just fine, and in
fact what the current text intended, while making it perfectly clear
what was intended.
- I am ambivalent about the Ombudsteam being able to remove someone from
a WG (editor/secretary/chair) position. While it certainly doesn't get
into the morass that we do with NomCom-appointed positions, it seems to
me that it's still a bit of "crossing-the-streams", and as far as I can
tell the same kinds of things that can be done for NomCom-appointed
positions (ask them to consider resigning their position, exclusion from
meetings / mailing lists, etc.) would have equal effectiveness. So, I'm
not sure it's necessary. But as I said, I'm ambivalent.
As for the thought experiment on how a recall might go after such an
incident: I am certainly more sanguine than Sam. Presuming an incident
where the Ombudsteam decides that an AD can no longer participate in
meetings and mailing lists (already I would hope a *highly* unusual
circumstance) *and* the AD goes haywire and refuses to relinquish their
title (even more unlikely) *and* the "two sides" try to get their
friends on the recall committee, *and* these supposed friends agree to
participate in such a thing (I have a hard time imagining any of the
people I know in the IETF being willing to do so), we still have the
case that the (hopefully sane) ISOC-President-appointed recall committee
chair is going to tell the committee, "Look, we are not deciding whether
this person can start participating in meetings or on mailing lists
again. They can't and that's not going to change. The only question is
whether they get to keep their office in light of that fact." If at that
(almost unimaginable) point a sufficient number of people on the recall
committee are willing to be so destructive to the IETF that they are
willing to participate in leaving the person in the position, I think
I'm willing to live with the IETF going *boom*.
pr
--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478