Re: Selection Process

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

>I'd like to put in a word for the sentiment from the plenary that perhaps we
>don't need the recall procedure.  The two year term supplies a natural point
>for graceful resignation or failure to be reappointed.  It's not clear to me
>that we are likely to have a problem so pressing as to require an ever-present
>threat of public accusation, trial, and crucifixion.
>
>I'd like to see us come to a consensus that the recall procedure isn't worth
>its painful implications and potential.

Bob,
  While I'm trying to tune it rather than getting rid of it, I don't
think we disagree very much.  I don't think it should be needed.  I
don't think it is likely to be needed.  But I didn't feel the level of
pain, frustration, and suspicion of the motives of others expressed by
several people on this list over the last few months.  To the degree to
which that level of pain and frustration was real (and I assume it was),
it is probably better to have a recall procedure--and make it hard
enough to use, and at the end of enough procedures, that it will rarely
if ever be triggered--than to be without such a procedure.

  Absent such a recall procedure, we risk having to go through the
"painful implications and potential" of a process like that of the last
few months as the only practical alternative.

    john