Subject: There are several flaws in RFC 3934 's Suspension Processes require Notice when a Suspension is Lifted.

From: "TS Glassey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 15:18:16 -0700

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "TS Glassey" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>; "Contreras, Jorge" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 8:09 AM
Subject: Suspension Processes require Notice when a Suspension is Lifted.

> Folks -
> when the IETF lifts a Suspension just doing it and neglecting to announce 
> that the individual who was suspended is an act which can only be reviewed 
> as 'an attempt by the WG Chair to keep that person off that list' and in 
> doing so, and one would think that this opens the Sponsor's and the IETF 
> itself to more pain.

This is true since suspensions are announced on the list itself.

--- snip ---

> In summary, if the IETF notices the party who is suspended when posting 
> rights are removed then they MUST notice as well when the rights are 
> restored. Nothing else is ethical or reasonable...
>
> Also when an appeal is acted on, someone needs to say something to the 
> person who filed that appeal.

The purpose here is disclosure...

> Right? - so who is that and when is it said?
>
> We need both of these flow-issues addressed in that process.
>
>
> ---
> Personal Disclaimers Apply
>
> TS Glassey 

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf