IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Mon, 16 March 2015 16:50 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.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 C79331A88CA; Mon, 16 Mar 2015 09:50:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.61
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.61 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 CgzWsk2zhGtN; Mon, 16 Mar 2015 09:50:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A90751A88BF; Mon, 16 Mar 2015 09:50:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.35] (helo=JcK-HP8200.jck.com) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1YXYDG-0006ox-Nr; Mon, 16 Mar 2015 12:49:58 -0400
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 12:49:53 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Subject: Re: What is a "management position? [Last Call: <draft-farrresnickel-harassment-05.txt> (IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures) to Best Current Practice]
Message-ID: <ED6260E2AAFFC99652F6E0B2@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJ+6EXPiXvLD4ihinoTg6pRB_uTM6MC7nEScdk_Q4Zs1MQ@mail.gmail.com>
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> <2AE2D092-C32A-46EB-88CA-71366965F4D7@cisco.com> <5505D873.1040203@gmail.com> <50369CD579C63FE8E549BCA6@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <CALaySJ+6EXPiXvLD4ihinoTg6pRB_uTM6MC7nEScdk_Q4Zs1MQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.35
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/E4bxB5VrLK5_e7CFMTZsirYAgfM>
Cc: IETF Discussion List <ietf@ietf.org>, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>, IESG <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: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 16:50:05 -0000

(distro trimmed)

--On Monday, March 16, 2015 10:02 -0400 Barry Leiba
<barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:

>> Given the context in which this came up, it is also important
>> to note that the set of people who can, in theory, be
>> recalled (who might plausibly be "management") is not the
>> same as the set of people appointed by the Nomcom (some of
>> whom might, I suppose, not be)/
> 
> That point, at least, is easy to take care of by referring to
> them not as "appointed by NomCom," but as "subject to the
> recall procedures in RFC 7437," which procedures now include
> all sitting IAOC members, including those not appointed by the
> NomCom.

Agreed.  While I still believe the problems are more
fundamental, that small issue does need fixing and that would be
a reasonable fix.

   john

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email