RE: Official notice of appeal on suspension rights.

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

Todd, The IESG has asked me to lead the handling of this appeal.

So you appeal has been received and we're evaluating it and
discussing it. I'll get back to you when we have a resolution
and/or answer.

Thanks,
Bert Wijnen (for the IESG)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: todd glassey [mailto:todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net]
> Sent: woensdag 6 augustus 2003 4:14
> To: iesg@ietf.org; chair@ietf.org; problem-statement@alvestrand.no
> Cc: degarmo5@earthlink.net; Contreras, Jorge
> Subject: Official notice of appeal on suspension rights.
> 
> 
> Be advised that this is an official submission of an appeal on the
> suspension of my posting rights as per Harald Alverstrand, 
> Chair of the
> IETF. I want to get this matter expedited so we can either 
> reconcile this or
> take it into an open court.
> 
> Harald's commentary regarding my posting is ridiculous.
> 
> 
>     With regard to my posting 20% of the list's traffic, the 
> 2418 clause
> that calls this a Denial of Service Attack is in fact a smoke 
> screen to
> allow the IETF to set limits on how many postings any one 
> person can make,
> but only in arbitrary matters, clearly causing a tortuous 
> interference with
> my participation since issues are being resolved that I 
> cannot participate
> in.  And unless the IESG or the IETF is going to formally 
> place a specific
> limit on the number of responses that one can submit to 
> postings, then this
> matter is clearly an act of prejudicial harassment of the 
> IETF Chair and the
> WG Chairs to suppress that the IPR group is essentially not 
> in my opinion
> fixing problems but rather making the process and the 
> disclosure issues more
> painful.
> 
> 
> Further, the Chair commented that I had "Threatened legal 
> action" against
> several list members, and I would like to see specific 
> evidence to this
> "fact" as it was used, since I clearly deny that this is true. Please
> produce the specific commentary and explain how it was 
> threatening. What I
> have asked several officers of the IETF and the IESG is 
> whether there is
> financial coverage for them in operating the organization as 
> any good entity
> would have. They have refused to answer this in any way. I 
> have also voiced
> an opinion that the IETF's policies are bringing it head-on 
> into areas where
> legal action will not be avoidable but I have not said 
> specifically that I
> would sue anyone. I don't make silly threats, I act upon the causative
> actions in appropriate manners only.
> 
> Finally the commentary that "I have been warned" repeatedly 
> by the WG Chairs
> to not post off topic mailings is ridiculous and contrary to 
> the IETF's
> charter and operating process, and it must formally take 
> notice of this or
> face the problems that this refusal to accept the obvious 
> brings. By their
> very nature, the IETF WG' Lists MUST accept all postings or 
> it is impossible
> to disclose new ideas on the list, making the process of 
> submitting an I-D
> ***the only way that new ideas can be submitted*** or can be 
> vetted and for
> WG Chairs to suppress is contrary to the IETF's operational models (no
> matter how hokey they are) as defined in RFC2026, RFC2223, 
> and RFC2418.
> 
> Please be advised, that I will continue to escalate this matter until
> resolution is forthcoming, and yes Jorge, the other person on 
> the cc line is
> one of my attorneys.
> 
> Todd Glassey
> 
>