IAOC Openness Guidelines
These thoughts courtesy of Sam Hartman:
The IAOC can choose to overturn or otherwise act to reverse a
decision if it believes that is the best course of action to follow.
Examples include changing procedures if they happen not to work very
well or attempting to buy out or terminate a contract if it is clear
that the contract is no longer in the IASA's best interest.
Members of the IAOC may take into account comments from the
community and may decide to reconsider a decision based on such
comments even if no formal requirement to review the decision or to
respond to the comments exists. In other words if the community
convinces the IAOC they were wrong, it is reasonable for the IAOC to
go do something about it.
The IAOC should listen to comments. By this I mean that they should
be aware of comments they are receiving and weight them according to
their value. It's fine to ignore pointless comments; probably even
fine to pay less attention to comments from people who have a
track record of not providing useful input. It would not be
desirable for the IAOC to have completely ignored a constructive,
well-reasoned comment simply because there was no formal obligation
to respond to the comment. (The IAOC still might not respond, but
someone should have at least read the comment and considered what it
said)
It is reasonable for individuals, groups or organized bodies to
comment to the community and the IAOC on IAOC decisions. For
example if the IAOC selected a meeting sight according to its
criteria and the IESG noticed that many working group chairs and
document authors were unwilling to come to this sight, it would be
reasonable for the IESG to inform the IAOC of this observation.
Depending on costs of canceling a meeting, it might (although
probably would not) be reasonable for the IESG to ask the IAOC to
reconsider.
Link to this Page