Re: IAOC Request for community feedback

[Doug Barton <[e-mail]>]

First in regards to Bob's post a bit ago, I personally am not asserting
that the IAOC has broken any rules. I was sincere in my applause for
their requesting feedback on this question; in spite of the fact that I
disagree with their premise.

On 10/23/2012 2:32 PM, John Leslie wrote:
> Doug Barton <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> You asked for feedback, you have now received a non-trivial number of
>> responses saying that arbitrarily declaring the position vacant is not
>> an appropriate action. You have also received volunteers for the recall
>> process. Rather than spending more time on trying to justify declaring
>> the position vacant, why not get started on that recall?
> 
>    I strongly urge folks who think as Doug does to _read_ RFC 3777.

I watched the castle being built, I've no desire to live in it. :) I did
do a quick review of it just now, and at the risk of repeating myself I
think anyone who is interested in revamping it would be putting their
efforts to excellent use.

>    Note that the recall process can only start with 20 "members of the
> IETF community, who are qualified to be voting members of a nominating
> committee" petitioning to the Internet Society President.
> 
>    If that happens, the recall process will start; if not, it won't.

How very tautological of you. :)

[snip]

>    Myself, I don't expect to petition or volunteer to serve on a
> recall committee. The recall process isn't intended to be "practical",
> IMHO, and seems intended only to prod the subject of recall to resign.
> In other organizations, I have lived through longish periods of
> uncertainty about the exact status of an individual, and I no longer
> find it scary.

I tend to agree, which is one of the reasons I think the procedure
should be followed as written.

Doug