Re: [Mtgvenue] issue #3: Too many mandatory

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

On 4/5/2017 3:02 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:
> On 5 Apr 2017, at 16:02, Dave Crocker wrote:
> 
>> "move or cancel" is language that only has meaning /after/ selection. 
>> It is therefore formally out of scope.
> 
> Whoa there! Dave, it is not your call that this (or anything) is 
> formally out of scope.

That's a style of objection that we do frequently in the IETF and misses 
the distinction between authority and ability.  Any of us can raise the 
question.  I'm raising it.


> As I said at the f2f meeting, the charter is not crystal clear on this 
> point:
> 
>> The MTGVENUE working group is the forum where the IETF community can
>> discuss and agree on what should go into the policies, the selection
>> process, and the detailed criteria going forward. All criteria and all
>> other aspects of the process are open for discussion.

Again, all of the language is about the selection process.  It says 
nothing about contracting or canceling or any other part of the venue 
process as being within scope.

> 
> As Alissa said at the meeting, the charter is flexible enough to allow 
> the WG to write a document that can be applied only at the beginning of 
> the process, or might be applied at multiple points. 

Where is this sort of flexibility justified in the charter?

d/

ps. Again, the ultimate issue is that going beyond the specifics of 
/selection/ conflates things in a way that is already adding significant 
complexity to the discussion.

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net