"trouble maker"

[Daniel O. Awduche]

As a matter of principle, the process needs to focus on the 
merits of arguments, not some characterization of the individuals 
involved. Often times, people in authority have a tendency to 
portray others with dissenting views as "trouble makers," thereby 
precluding the diligence of applying basic management skills to 
resolve contentious issues and/or drive towards rough consensus.

i.e. there should be no place for the term "trouble maker" in 
IETF documents.

Cheers,
/Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: problem-statement-bounces at alvestrand.no
[mailto:problem-statement-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of James Seng
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2003 12:20 PM
To: problem-statement at alvestrand.no
Subject: "trouble maker"


I was going thru draft-ietf-problem-issue-statement and found something 
missing...

For those of us who have chair IETF WG, I am sure we have encountered, 
one time or another, members of the group whom we considered "trouble 
maker".

While the term "trouble maker" is a usually a matter of individual 
opinion, the type which I particularly have problem with are the ones 
who are extremely disruptive in the working group repeating issues 
usually with the attempt to derail the progress or having the attitute 
that "i-will-not-close-this-issue-unless-you-agree-with-me".

It become even more painful when these "trouble makers" are well-verse 
in "IETF appeal process" and not hesitant to use these rules to achieve 
their goal. It is a painful and waste of time for the chairs and the ADs

who are already overworked.

It is not unusual for a single "trouble maker" derailing the progress 
for as long as a year or more.

While we can debate over what is the appropriate solution to deal with 
"trouble makers", at least pls capture this issue in the problem
statement.

-James Seng