Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: BCP 83 PR-Action Against Dan Harkins

[John C Klensin <[e-mail]>]

--On Sunday, 02 October, 2022 11:14 -0700 Eric Rescorla
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 2, 2022 at 11:03 AM John C Klensin
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> --On Sunday, 02 October, 2022 10:33 -0700 Eric Rescorla
>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> > ...
>> > In particular, my experience is that it's far earlier to
>> > address misbehavior early on with smaller interventions than
>> > to wait until there is a long pattern of misbehavior and
>> > then ban
>> > someone. Nominally, we do have such mechanisms (SAA, etc.)
>> > but, they have proven so difficult to apply that the
>> > nominally last resort of the PR Action instead becomes in
>> > practice the only resort in practice.
>> 
>> Based on observations in recent months, I have somewhat more
>> confidence in the SAA mechanism than you do although I would
>> have agreed with you a couple of years ago,   As I said
>> earlier today, I'm concerned about their perceptions of what
>> they can or should do when the smaller and more private
>> interventions (even publicly suspending someone from a
>> particular list for a short time) fail, but a small bit of
>> tuning would fix that.
>> 
>> Situations in which all of the discretion --about whether to
>> act and how-- is vested in a single WG chair or list
>> maintainer without obligations to consult, e.g., either a
>> co-chair or AD, may be another matter.   Without criticizing
>> anyone, I tend to not trust any one person's judgment
>> (including my own) in isolation or without consultation,
>> especially if they perceive themselves as being abused.
>> 
> 
> Do you have some mechanisms in mind or are you merely speaking
> in the abstract?
> 
> For instance, RFC 3934 explicitly requires the approval of the
> AD for posting rights removal,
> even for 30 days. Moreover, such a decision is appealable.
> 
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3934#section-2

More in the abstract.  The existing mechanisms, including that
one, should, if everyone does their jobs, considers the various
balances carefully, and is extra-careful when the circumstances
might lead to claims of bias, be adequate (or better).  And, of
course, the appeal mechanism (which, unlike recalls, which I
think came up elsewhere, in this thread, are an appropriate and,
IMO, effective remedy when those involved get things wrong or
even just don't pay sufficient attention.

   john