appeal mechanisms was Re: Ombuds-process

Keith Moore moore at
Mon Jun 30 12:15:23 CEST 2003

] At 11:06 AM 6/30/2003 -0400, Keith Moore wrote:
] >Let's take these two cases separately.  First, to some degree engineering
] >judgement is and must be subjective, so it may be perfectly valid for an AD
] >to reject a document on such grounds.  However since the reasons for
] >objection are made explicit, they can be the subject of an appeal - the
] >appellant can assert that the AD made a technical error in his subjective
] >judgement, and the IAB can agree or disagree as it sees fit.
] Yes, the IAB could agree or disagree with the IESG's technical
] decision...
] BUT, there would be no point in appealing the IESG's rejection of a
] document, because the IAB cannot overrule the IESG and publish the
] document, even if the IAB believes that the IESG made a technical or
] process error in rejecting the document.

if that's the case, we should probably fix it.  at the least the IAB should be
able to remand the document to IESG for consideration according to different


More information about the Problem-statement mailing list