Re: [Trustees] IETF Trust response to the appeal by John C Klensin (July 18, 2009

[SM <[e-mail]>]

Hi Russ,
At 12:07 07-09-2009, Russ Housley wrote:
>I'm sorry that you read it that way.  The first response that was 
>drafted was a point-by-point reply as you suggest.  It was extremely 
>repetitive, with the same points being made over and over.  I found 
>the reply cumbersome at best.  It was my suggestion that we take the 
>points that were made over and over in that formulation of the 
>response and structure it this way.

I do not have any doubt that you and the other individuals who are 
members of the IETF Trust are doing their best for the IETF Trust and the IETF.

I read the response of the IETF Trust to the appeal from John C. 
Klensin dated July 18, 2009 as described in the message posted by 
Thomas Narten.

There are a lot of discussions on the main IETF mailing list.  That 
mailing list is generally used to bring issues to the attention of 
the entire IETF Community and to discuss about them.  Some, if not 
most, of the issues and discussions may not be of interest to 
everyone in the IETF Community.  There has been complaints from IETF 
participants about amount of traffic on that list.  Maybe that's what 
prompted the IETF Trust to request that discussion of the response to 
the appeal be directed to the tlp-interest list.  An appeal is a 
serious matter.  The main IETF mailing list is the venue, in my 
opinion, to keep the entire IETF Community in the loop.

Regards,
-sm