Re: [Eligibility-discuss] New draft: draft-rescorla-istar-recall-00

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 7:07 PM Brian E Carpenter <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> >    The contents of the statement on the reasons for expulsion shall be
> >    held confidential by both bodies.  However, the member being proposed
> >    for expulsion in their sole discretion, MAY make their statement
> >    public.
>
> That is a little like the US Congress saying "We have impeached
> President Blimp but we're not going to tell you why." I certainly
> see the motivation for confidentiality about details, but there's
> something missing if the underlying issue is completely hidden.
>
> At least, shouldn't a one-line non-defamatory explanation be public?
>

I'm not religious about this. I wouldn't be opposed to such an explanation,
though I'd want to understand what the legal implications are.

-Ekr


> Regards
>    Brian Carpenter
>
> On 17-May-19 01:16, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I've just posted a fleshed out version of the proposal that MSJ
> > made a while back of allowing a body to recall its members. Here's
> > the rationale:
> >
> > This document proposes an alternate structure which is designed
> > to deal with just egregious cases (e.g., total member checkout,
> > major misconduct) but is also faster because it doesn't involve
> > spinning up the nomcom machinery (twice, once to recall and once
> > to replace). In this structure, the IAB/IESG would vote to
> > expel the offending member with consent from the other body.
> > The rationale here is that the body themselves is in the best
> > position to know when a member really needs to be removed.
> >
> > Thanks for reading!
> >
> > -Ekr
> >
>