Re: Just so I'm clear

jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Wed, 24 October 2012 05:09 UTC

Return-Path: <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FB8721F8C8E for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 22:09:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.44
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.44 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.159, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hhBBMQr1mqB5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 22:09:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BA8521F8C91 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 22:09:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Postfix, from userid 11178) id 5B23918C0A6; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 01:08:59 -0400 (EDT)
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Just so I'm clear
Message-Id: <20121024050859.5B23918C0A6@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 01:08:59 -0400
From: jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Cc: jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 05:09:01 -0000

    > From: Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us>

    > recalling someone from one of these positions _should_ be hard to do,
    > and should not be undertaken lightly.

No disagreement there - but we're not trying to recall him because of actions
he took, things he said, etc, etc.

Like I said, I think the US's federal constitution is a useful model here: it
has a very onerous process (impeachment and trial) with a high final bar
(2/3) for actions taken in response to what someone did/said, but a wholly
different, simpler and easier process (majority of Cabinet) for sidelining
someone because of incapacity.

And I doubt anyone here is seriously going to argue that Marshall is not
fulfulling his role...


    > From: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>

    > I am curious to know whether or not there are people who feel that
    > Marshall shouldn't be considered to have quit IAOC. If there's nobody
    > who feels that way I'm personally great with going ahead without a
    > recall.

Exactly.

	Noel