Charters, "normal process" versus ISOC, etc. (was: Re

[Jeanette Hofmann]

On 20 May 2003 at 9:46, Margaret Wasserman wrote:

 
> Do we really want an entire area run by a new, inexperienced
> IESG member?  And, does it really _decrease_ the load on the
> IESG, and Harald in particular, to add a new member to run
> this area?

In my understanding, the main reason for John's creative solution is to 
achieve to goals: 1. find a _neutral_ person to lead the reform process, 
preferably not being an IESG member 2. discuss and decide reform options 
on the basis of established procedures. 
> 
> I'd like to try to get to the core issue that is motivating
> this (and other) alternative proposal(s) -- some people (I'm
> not sure how many) don't trust the existing IESG, and Harald
> in particular, to run this process.

Now, you make it sound as if those who prefer a newly appointed AD do 
distrust Harald. This is certainly not the case as far as I am concerned. On 
the contrary. My point is that the chances of success of a reform process 
might decrease if the process is led by an authority structure that is obviously 
part of the problem.
> 
> I think that we need to determine where the consensus of
> the community lies on this issue.  I believe that the
> vast majority of us _do_ trust our current leadership.

Again, I don't think that personal distrust is the main issue here. It is about 
creating sound preconditions for the reform process. 

Jeanette 
> 
> I'm probably already on the record somewhere as saying that
> I trust the existing IESG, and Harald, to run this process.
> But, let me say something stronger...
> 
> IMO, Harald is the best person in the IETF to run the
> improvement process.  _Anyone_ that we pick to run the
> "Process Area" would, at best, be second choice.  I
> supported Harald's candidacy with the nomcom specifically
> _because_ I wanted him to run the process of fixing the
> IETF.
> 
> I also believe that the Nomcom chose Harald _knowing_
> that he was planning to do this.
> 
> If there was community consensus that someone else
> should be running this process, it should have been
> reflected in the Nomcom selection.
> 
> Margaret
> 
> 
>