Re: [Eligibility-discuss] Fwd: The "eligibility" list, and a virtual meeting

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 6:56 AM John C Klensin <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Thought about that way, even the analogy to US residents and
> voters (or residents of any other country or jurisdiction who
> are not allowed to choose their leadership) breaks down.  It
> might be reasonable if both populations are treated with equal
> fairness and respect but, if not, there are issues even if the
> "who votes" issue is not deemed appropriate for a solution.  For
> example, if a non-citizen (non-voting) resident were attached on
> the streets, I think most of us would assume that ethical
> behavior would suggest that they have access to law enforcement
> and other remedies rather than being treated as sub-humans whom
> it is reasonable and appropriate to attack or have attacked.
>

Actually, I don't think this analogy breaks down all. To the contrary, in
the case you mention those people have recourse to the legal system but not
to select their representatives. And similarly in the IETF remote people
can appeal but cannot participate in the selection of leadership.

-Ekr