Re: [Gendispatch] New Version Notification - draft-eggert-bcp45bis-04.txt

> I don't think it really matters.
> I am not aware of any successful appeal ever, so write whatever seems expedient,

Then perhaps you should look at the data.  There have been many
appeals that have been upheld.

Barry

> On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 11:51 PM Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> thanks for the suggestions. Please see https://github.com/larseggert/bcp45bis/pull/6 for a PR that rolls those in.
>>
>> On 2021-9-8, at 23:41, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:
>> >   Because an SAA serves at the discretion of the IETF Chair - even if
>> >   the IETF Chair is not otherwise involved in the operation of the SAA
>> >   team - any SAA decision could be appealed to the IAB.  The IAB shall
>> >   then review the situation and attempt to resolve it in a manner of
>> >   its own choosing.
>> >
>> > Why are we varying from the normal appeal process here?  One reason to
>> > keep the IETF Chair out of the operation is exactly so the first
>> > appeal *can* go to the IETF Chair, as it normally would.  Then to the
>> > plenary IESG, and then to the IAB.  I don't see a good reason to
>> > change that process.
>>
>> This was also brought up by Rob during his AD review. This text is based on the current text in BCP45, which says:
>>
>>    The IETF Chair, the IETF Executive Director, or a sergeant-at-arms
>>    appointed by the Chair is empowered to restrict posting by a person,
>>    or of a thread, when the content is inappropriate and represents a
>>    pattern of abuse.  They are encouraged to take into account the
>>    overall nature of the postings by an individual and whether
>>    particular postings are an aberration or typical.  Complaints
>>                                                       ^^^^^^^^^^
>>    regarding their decisions should be referred to the IAB.
>>    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> I assumed that "complaints" were supposed to be appeals, because otherwise it's undefined what the IAB was supposed to do with these complaints.
>>
>> I'm fully OK with using the regular appeals process here, but since it would be a change from the original BCP45 and the intent was to do a minimal bis, I didn't make that change.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Lars
>>
>> --
>> Gendispatch mailing list
>> Gendispatch@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch