Re: delegating (portions of) ietf list disciplinary process

[Scott W Brim <sbrim at cisco.com>]

On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 05:15:05PM +0200, Brian E Carpenter allegedly wrote:
> I'm interested to know whether people would see arguments for
> either or both of
> 
> 1. An IETF Ombudsman (or Ombudscommittee), to act as a dispute
> mediator.

Good idea.  These disputes take a lot of care and interested parties
are often not willing or able to put the time into them that they
need.  "Discussion" can get abrupt and counterproductive.  Even the
very existence of an ombudsman will ensure that parties approach a
dispute more carefully.

> 2. An IETF "netiquette" committee, to offload list banning procedures
> from the IESG.

I don't think so.  I prefer that this responsibility stay with a few
individuals, so that it is taken very seriously -- not only by them
but by everyone.  A committee would lead to dilution of responsibility
as well as endless discussion on every dispute.

swb

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf