I have never once seen a message from Pradeep Kumar Xplorer that was of the least value to the IETF; to the contrary, their messages were always either pointless or disruptive in nature. I see no reason to restore their posting rights. BTW, thanks for implementing this part of the BCP 83 process. Regards Brian Carpenter On 06-May-25 00:43, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote:
A PR-action was approved [1] in May 2019 that restricted the posting rights of Pradeep Kumar Xplorer for the following mailing list(s): * art * curdle * dane * drinks * extra * forces * homenet * http-auth * ietf * ietf-privacy * ietf-smtp * iucg * lemonade * shutup Per section 2 of RFC 3683, “Once taken, this action remains in force until explicitly nullified and SHOULD remain in force for at least one year”. More than a year has passed since May 2019. The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this nullify action based on Pradeep Kumar Xplorer’s behavior *since May 2019*. Please send substantive comments to the last-call@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2025-06-02 (4 weeks). Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the Subject line to allow automated sorting. If sending private feedback to the IESG, please indicate if you would be open to having your comments anonymized and shared in a summary with the IETF community. Please note: comments should be limited to the criteria described in BCP 83, notably on whether the individual in question has engaged after May 2019 in postings that are "unprofessional commentary, regardless of the general subject" in a manner disruptive enough to prevent this nullify action. -éric vyncke (in my capacity of Area Director per RFC 3683 section 2) [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/T95lWkh6BFuqGClwqu7nDXnjwXc/ <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/T95lWkh6BFuqGClwqu7nDXnjwXc/>
-- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
