Re: rules for the sake of rules, was Just so I'm clear

["John Levine" <[e-mail]>]

>But we don't have rules that say, "failure to attend for X period,
>without permission, will result in the position being declared
>vacant".  I we did this would be simple.  I don't think we have
>any choice from a proceedural point of view other than to start
>recall proceedings.

Having reread RFC 4071, I don't see a rule that says that the death of
a member will result in the position being declared vacant, either.
Nor are there any rules that say what documentation would be required
to establish that someone had died.

At some point we have to allow a sliver of common sense to intervene
so people can do reasonable things to solve problems.

R's,
John