On Mon, May 5, 2025, at 09:32, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Hiya,On 05/05/2025 14:18, Salz, Rich wrote:> I don’t remember what this person did, but five years is excessive.> My guess is that they don’t even care any more. I am strongly in> favor of nullifying the PR-Action.Interesting. My conclusion was the opposite - I never saw anythingapproximating a useful message from that (set of) email addresses,so I'd not be in favour of this nullifying action until after there'sa better moderation scheme in place and up and running already. Oncethere is, the sure, let's get rid of the legacy BCP 83 thing.In contrast, I'm fine with nullifying the PR action against Dan Harkinsas Dan has continued to contribute usefully on other lists so I'd behopeful that he'd play ball on admin topics too rather than go throughall that again.
I am in agreement with Stephen on both of these. Let's bring Dan back, but I have had interactions with PKX on a working group I chair, and when I asked others they said "oh yeah, that missing stair[1] - we all know not to engage".
Well, I didn't know at the time. I'd rather have other people who haven't had the pleasure of interacting with this account not have to go through the same experience.
In the end our Area Director at the time stepped in: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/extra/NUQCbp0snjUd3OLB3Zwk_NgnhS4/
I do not believe that allowing that account to participate in the IETF again would lead to anything other than wasting more people's time.
Bron.
--
Bron Gondwana, CEO, Fastmail Pty Ltd
brong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
