Dean,

In response to the attached, please note another example
of inaccuracy:

"Procedural Irregularities in the PR-Action

1. Step 1 was not followed. Only an AD can initiate a PR-Action.

"The IESG received a request from Dave Crocker to take action under RFC 3683 against Dean Anderson. Mr Crocker
alleged disruption of the IETF and DNSEXT lists and provided sample emails "

In this case, it is reported that Dave Crocker initiated the PR-Action. "

Inaccurate. It is reported that he *requested* it. It was initiated by
me within the IESG and passed to David Kessens.

The IESG is not prepared to re-analyse your appeal and list all
the inaccuracies. If you appeal further to the IAB, we will
of course respond to any enquiries we receive from them.

Brian

Fuller, Barbara wrote:
> Dear IESG Members:
>
> I am forwarding a message to you from Dean Anderson. The message was
> sent to the Secretariat ticket system (iesg-secretary@ietf.org), and not
> to the IESG list (iesg@ietf.org).
>
> Barbara
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dean Anderson via RT [mailto:iesg-secretary@ietf.org]
> Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 1:32 AM
> Subject: [Inquiry #85751] Re: Appeal response to Dean Anderson
>
>
> Sat Apr 01 01:31:42 2006: Request 85751 was acted upon.
> Transaction: Ticket created by dean@av8.com
> Queue: IETF-IESG-Support
> Subject: Re: Appeal response to Dean Anderson
> Owner: Nobody
> Requestors: dean@av8.com
> Status: new
> Ticket <URL: http://ticket.ietf.org:80/Ticket/Display.html?id=85751 >
>
>
>
> Your response claims that the appeal contains factual errors (plural),
> but cites
> only one error. The cited error, on investigation, is not supported
> fact.
> Neither record of a vote, nor minutes of dicussion are provided in the
> teleconference minutes or elsewhere, as required by RFC 2026 and RFC
> 3683. I
> assume that the IESG does not wish to change its position on this claim,
> and I
> will include it in the appeal to the IAB.
>
> But the response implied there were other factual errors. What are the
> other
> factual errors in the Appeal document? Please substantiate this claim.
>
>
> Dean Anderson
> CEO
> Av8 Internet, Inc
>
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, IESG Secretary wrote:
>
>
>>On March 7, 2006, the IESG received an appeal from Dean Anderson
>>(http://www.ietf.org/IESG/APPEALS/Anderson-appeal-03-08-2006.htm)
>>against its decision announced on January 5, 2006 at
>>
>
> http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg01967.htm
> l
>
>>The IESG has read Mr Anderson's appeal and concluded that it does
>>not contain any arguments that would cause it to change its decision.
>>It also contains factual errors, e.g. asserting that the IESG's
>>decision was not minuted. The appeal is rejected.
>>
>>The IESG.
>>
>>
>
>