Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW comment period

[Masataka Ohta <[e-mail]>]

Bob Hinden wrote:

> Rereading RFC3005, it 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.
> 
> The intended role of the sergeant-at-arms is for content that is is
> inappropriate and represents a pattern of abuse.   There was no
> "inappropriate" nor "pattern of abuse" here whatsoever.

I think the original intention of rfc3005 is to restrict such
people as requiring alternative root zones for DNS purely for
their economic reasons.

Michael StJohns wrote:

> The SAA MUST NOT be used as a tool, or even be perceived as being
> used as a tool to stymie dissent, or to stop or steer discussions
> that might be uncomfortable to the SAA or I*.
Considering that "sergeant-at-arms appointed by the Chair" [rfc3005]
and "Complaints regarding their decisions should be referred to the
IAB" [rfc3005], which means SAAs are loyal to I*, its practically
impossible, which is why SAAs power must be strictly limited as is
described by rfc3005.

As such, I was surprised to have received a mail recently from an
SAA saying:

    We understand that this style of communication was accepted (if
    not encouraged) in the past, but it is no longer the expectation
    now.

As criticizing a draft without reading the draft is the worst
possible "unprofessional commentary" [rfc3005], it is established
manner of IETF to dismiss a person who repeatedly behave so by
saying "read the draft" with quotations from relevant part of the
draft.

Or, do I misunderstand something?

						Masataka Ohta