>>>>> "Dean" == Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com> writes:

Dean> On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> >>>>> "Dean" == Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com> writes:
>>
>> Dean, here I'm speaking as an individual and I suspect some IESG
>> members may agree with me and others may disagree.
>>
>>
>>
Dean> I misunderstood you. I thought that the "almost certain to
Dean> appeal" meant an appeal should be accepted now.
>>
>> So, when there are two paths to resolving an issue--one confrontational and
>> one reasonably cordial we try and choose the cordial path.

Dean> This has nothing whatsoever to do with cordial vs confrontational. This has to
Dean> do with following process. I have filed an Appeal.

OK. If you want to be formal, it is my opinion that your appeal
should be rejected because it does not clearly state which decision
you are appealing.

If you were to follow up to your appeal and ask for it to be
considered as an appeal and clearly state what decision you are
appealing then I agree we are obligated to consider it as an appeal.

Perhaps you are appealing the decision of the IESG to issue a last
call on the anycast bcp.

I'm honestly not sure whether you would need to appeal such a decision
to David or to the whole IESG. According to RFC 2026, it is the IESG
who makes a decision to last call a document. However the IESG
delegates that to individual IESG members.

Perhaps Brian and or David can shed light on whether they would like
such an appeal to start at David or to start at the ISEG [sic] chair.