IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Eligibility-discuss] Handling the fear of "bogus" recall petitions

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sun, 27 October 2019 19:26 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: eligibility-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: eligibility-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C03E1200B1 for <eligibility-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 12:26:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id buC1nGji96Yp for <eligibility-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 12:26:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62c.google.com (mail-pl1-x62c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02E81120024 for <eligibility-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 12:26:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62c.google.com with SMTP id w8so4257984plq.5 for <eligibility-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 12:26:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=jpIrpu0UnYpE4sg+LheXjirCkuvqxfpXn8n8yFTL5sA=; b=nY/5W/eVVuW8XryeRLrrtpZkyct3G7Yi+sdDrvjgR+39NV9Nk+c+BcY41Mq0+w5Bk9 n5r6uTU36ZlE8FopEmjT/iDxMIrLvGukElx7gXhFRogwYCY70wu0jZiD9O4JzoFJb7MQ sOYiiYsB7QUUBjVPr5eFUv9Lz1zxu6UVfvdhJtRDzE5EfrYfgltyrseokmJGS7CQ223J 98DSJA6KliwAj+10OAI9PK1pBqGkWMMDOHkZ9NrVvFq5DvvBC6NIPxXpAS8z3M5qhSIK GYPZlwmd+dRPsDo0IZCw10vLvBH6UzQaydKXgTf2WjGTTjSSI6K87VesKpGQSyu5q/hB psmg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=jpIrpu0UnYpE4sg+LheXjirCkuvqxfpXn8n8yFTL5sA=; b=m5E3Zf2Iq68ZydxEZrzb/52oW6wg8ejv2eqjVO0tecRxKv0p9PX6auc6dlxCHHWb0O OqvfKPe8xzDWkRzbWZf/XBPcMmtZdGBPzzfbGCd9d1Ypo2FE3KeUSjVCqFTUNUhcHyM2 WIvtwK25F33acVZxHpfIDubP1YxkNNGnMDYyhPHQ77KbSQkCXdSsM4pYJyIcaKpRSbE/ zIg3P8OQ+JhNiwTowXjLSRJUheYF1NoN8aXxukKEeKbrjRT3ncpiUXifPeoe3X0Zci9w d3J+K+t4sRMmmyVJJnZi8Rar2QxlGL2HgndMKSjGW9xZb2XlXPFJxPdtTQ6G8F2SmBIs ZzCQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXspazfQDlxyNvBTQN4QuhHK5aEfk80Wu6rUrzmjkvvylT4v0z5 4hvR76pOiuaFTpu+Yi3LgYqBN9b7
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyZWojImfTy42/HboHBRuTSExLdGUZ03T8Bf9Lk9O+Yb9lDyJgN6Xk45RZUZ3M0B7UkG/+iVA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d209:: with SMTP id t9mr15753064ply.278.1572204406151; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 12:26:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.30] (46.137.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.137.46]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v17sm2864463pfc.41.2019.10.27.12.26.43 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 27 Oct 2019 12:26:45 -0700 (PDT)
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk, 'Eliot Lear' <lear@cisco.com>, Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net>, eligibility-discuss@ietf.org
References: <00c801d58a9a$53693c60$fa3bb520$@olddog.co.uk> <CB806045-0E5E-4445-A377-7CD547B9DD90@cisco.com> <010a01d58ac1$c0ab2320$42016960$@olddog.co.uk> <dc3bf13f-0178-8e4c-6680-ae3258ac1a9b@gmail.com> <017b01d58b1f$37766250$a66326f0$@olddog.co.uk> <3f4c4ba0-9737-8fa8-6207-a239f1084f14@gmail.com> <23383.1572203091@localhost>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c8f4c979-79c1-d6a6-0575-ed5c76c99076@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 08:26:42 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <23383.1572203091@localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/eligibility-discuss/rvVeJ4gzq5zNWbbYTkdGxB4mYCA>
Subject: Re: [Eligibility-discuss] Handling the fear of "bogus" recall petitions
X-BeenThere: eligibility-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <eligibility-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/eligibility-discuss>, <mailto:eligibility-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/eligibility-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:eligibility-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:eligibility-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eligibility-discuss>, <mailto:eligibility-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2019 19:26:48 -0000

On 28-Oct-19 08:04, Michael Richardson wrote:
> 
> Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>     > The alternative would be some complex criteria that petitioners must
>     > have been subscribed to N mailing lists for M months, or co-authored at
>     > least X drafts, or something like that. But that quickly becomes a
>     > bureaucratic nightmare. So I'd be more inclined to go with Adrian's
>     > idea, with maybe 1/3 of petitioners needing to be Nomcom-eligible.
> 
> Doesn't this break if we later change nomcom-eligible to include remote-only participants?

The two discussions may not be entirely separable.
 
> (I don't think that the complex criteria need to be bureaucratic. It's just a
> few lines of python)

Well, there are things like people whose email address changes but yes, it's
not really the mechanics of the criteria - just the complexity for people
to understand. The current rule is at least fairly simple.

   Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email