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

[Margaret Wasserman]

Hi Jeannette,

At 04:26 PM 5/20/2003 +0200, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
> > 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.

Thanks for making this point.  This is what I meant by trying
to get to the core issue that is motivating this discussion...

I am not sure that I agree with your point, though.  I guess it
depends on your definition of "reform".  Most of my experience
regarding intentional change within organizations has been in
corporate environments where change and reorganization is typically
lead by the existing management.  And, in many cases, this is
quite successful.

> > > 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.

What leads you to believe that having a "neutral" person oversee
the process is necessary to create a sound precondition for the
reform process?

Margaret