Fw: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some
I am forwarding this on behalf of Dean Anderson. > > Thanks > > --Dean > > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > > > From: "todd glassey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > Why cant the IETF and IESG Embrace open elections > > > > Because the members are generally happy with the system we have now. It's > > called democracy - and you're outvoted. > > I think that in fact, members aren't very happy with the system that we > have now. If they were happy, they wouldn't be changing it. > > I think that the system has created a very closed, and very unfair > management selection process that is not benefiting the members are > large, but benefiting a few private interests. > > > Remember, we had this system for quite a while before the last major rework > > of the process (i.e. we'd all seen it in action for some years, and were able > > to judge how well was working), and the outcome of that rework was a > > standards document - i.e. something suject to community approval, i.e. > > democracy - which made adjustments, but retained the basic framework. If > > people weren't generally happy with that basic framework, it would have been > > obvious at the Last Call of the document. > > > > IMO, the IETF has some significant problems, but the process for selecting > > people for leadership positions isn't one of them. > > I think the IETF and ISOC do have some very significant problems, and > that those problems are primarilly mismanagement, disloyalty, and > improper use of the ISOC/IETF/IESG/IAB to benefit the personal and > adverse interests of the management. The ISOC/IETF employees have > accrued some torts against the organization for defamation and > defamatory false reports of member misconduct. > > There is plenty of documentation now of disloyalty, fraudulent > misrepresentation, collusion, and bad faith. To see a little bit, look > at the Appeal submitted recently to the IAB: > > http://www.av8.net/IETF-watch/Appeal_of_IESG_decision_of_July_10_2006-v4.pdf > or > http://www.av8.net/IETF-watch/Appeal_of_IESG_decision_of_July_10_2006-v4.html > > > > -- > Av8 Internet Prepared to pay a premium for better service? > www.av8.net faster, more reliable, better service > 617 344 9000 > > ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Fw: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some
Isn't he barred from posting here? On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 07:51:27PM -0700, todd glassey wrote: > I am forwarding this on behalf of Dean Anderson. > > > > > Thanks > > > > --Dean > > > > > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > > > > > From: "todd glassey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > Why cant the IETF and IESG Embrace open elections > > > > > > Because the members are generally happy with the system we have now. > It's > > > called democracy - and you're outvoted. > > > > I think that in fact, members aren't very happy with the system that we > > have now. If they were happy, they wouldn't be changing it. > > > > I think that the system has created a very closed, and very unfair > > management selection process that is not benefiting the members are > > large, but benefiting a few private interests. > > > > > Remember, we had this system for quite a while before the last major > rework > > > of the process (i.e. we'd all seen it in action for some years, and were > able > > > to judge how well was working), and the outcome of that rework was a > > > standards document - i.e. something suject to community approval, i.e. > > > democracy - which made adjustments, but retained the basic framework. If > > > people weren't generally happy with that basic framework, it would have > been > > > obvious at the Last Call of the document. > > > > > > IMO, the IETF has some significant problems, but the process for > selecting > > > people for leadership positions isn't one of them. > > > > I think the IETF and ISOC do have some very significant problems, and > > that those problems are primarilly mismanagement, disloyalty, and > > improper use of the ISOC/IETF/IESG/IAB to benefit the personal and > > adverse interests of the management. The ISOC/IETF employees have > > accrued some torts against the organization for defamation and > > defamatory false reports of member misconduct. > > > > There is plenty of documentation now of disloyalty, fraudulent > > misrepresentation, collusion, and bad faith. To see a little bit, look > > at the Appeal submitted recently to the IAB: > > > > > http://www.av8.net/IETF-watch/Appeal_of_IESG_decision_of_July_10_2006-v4.pdf > > or > > > http://www.av8.net/IETF-watch/Appeal_of_IESG_decision_of_July_10_2006-v4.html > > > > > > > > -- > > Av8 Internet Prepared to pay a premium for better service? > > www.av8.net faster, more reliable, better service > > 617 344 9000 > > > > > > > ___ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf -- Tim/::1 ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Fw: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some
Tim Chown wrote: Isn't he barred from posting here? If by "he" you mean Dean Anderson, yes. As I observed, the delete key is handy. Brian On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 07:51:27PM -0700, todd glassey wrote: I am forwarding this on behalf of Dean Anderson. ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Fw: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process rather than some
On Thursday, September 14, 2006 01:37:11 PM +0100 Tim Chown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Isn't he barred from posting here? Perhaps, but one of the checks against abuse of the ability to bar posters is that they can still get a point across if they can convince someone else to forward their comments. -- Jeff ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
