Re: What is a "management position? [Last Call: <draft-farrresnickel-harassment-05.txt> (IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures) to Best Current Practice]

joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> Sat, 14 March 2015 19:07 UTC

Return-Path: <joelja@bogus.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF6251A0145 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 12:07:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 dhelYoVG4Zjm for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 12:07:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73C191A00FE for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 12:07:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mb-aye.local ([IPv6:2601:9:3402:7bb1:9468:9049:bdf4:f6b1]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t2EJ7uau094106 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sat, 14 Mar 2015 19:07:56 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com)
Message-ID: <5504870B.8070101@bogus.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 12:07:55 -0700
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/36.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Spencer Dawkins <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: What is a "management position? [Last Call: <draft-farrresnickel-harassment-05.txt> (IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures) to Best Current Practice]
References: <20150116152211.25947.49086.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <20150117174430.9A0471ACE15@ietfa.amsl.com> <20150306163724.GA32205@verdi> <tsl385im2yp.fsf@mit.edu> <781553AA-EA2C-4057-9888-491C80A780DA@piuha.net> <54FE045D.3080606@qti.qualcomm.com> <tslr3sxep1l.fsf@mit.edu> <54FE6297.4090008@qti.qualcomm.com> <tslzj7i2wid.fsf@mit.edu> <55019E72.4090004@qti.qualcomm.com> <tslfv9a2t6p.fsf@mit.edu> <36671C44-DE53-4AC9-B8EA-465BF97B2FDB@piuha.net> <tsly4n0zo6g.fsf@mit.edu> <550350C4.9040201@qti.qualcomm.com> <5503914A.7060209@gmail.com> <5503BF22.5020902@gmail.com> <55046AB2.5050602@bogus.com> <FA06C6BE8A6E8722000B590C@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <FA06C6BE8A6E8722000B590C@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5cfhc4uaCFwWfGAlclUg7o7dld6530KGh"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/AI7GlY2yNTUrkroi_ACV7bJ5qZs>
Cc: IETF Discussion List <ietf@ietf.org>, iesg@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 19:07:58 -0000

On 3/14/15 11:54 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
> 
> 
> --On Saturday, March 14, 2015 10:06 -0700 joel jaeggli
> <joelja@bogus.com> wrote:
> 
>>> For the recallable positions, the situation is much more
>>> tricky because a recall petition needs 20 signatories and is
>>> announced. Let's get real : if that happens, the
>>> confidentiality *will* be breached.
>>
>> I don't think we can know that a priori.
>>
>> Our previous experiment with the recall process involved
>> unavailability, not some causal condition. I don't think
>> there's particular merit in spelling out how a recall will be
>> iniatiated, as that is dictated by circumstances and the power
>> to do is vested in nomcom qualified individuals
> 
> Joel,
> 
> First, we've had no previous experience with the "recall
> process".  The example I assure you are referring to was one in
> which commitments to sign had been collected and it was clear
> that the recall process would be initiated if the individual
> involved did not resign, but he did.

You are incorrect, the process was initiated.

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg10887.html

It was not necessary for it to run to completion.

...