Hi Vijay and my apologies for the delay in this response.  Thank you for your review.

Please see below:

On 26.11.2025 16:01, Vijay Gurbani via Datatracker wrote:
Document: draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes
Title: IETF Community Moderation
Reviewer: Vijay Gurbani
Review result: Ready with Issues

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>.

Document: draft-ietf-modpod-group-processes-13
Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani
Review Date: 2025-11-26
IETF LC End Date: 2025-11-28
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: This I-D is ready for BCP status but has some issues that must be
addressed.  These are detailed below.

Major issues:
1. I do not get a sense of how many "moderator teams" there will be?  Is there
one IETF-wide moderator team?

There is a single moderator team.  This is stated at the beginning of Section 2 as follows:

    A moderator team for the IETF will develop
    guidelines for moderation and will facilitate their consistent
    implementation and application as detailed below.

In addition, a definite article is generally used ("the moderation team").


Or does each area have a moderator team? 2.
Section 2: It was not entirely clear to me that *this* I-D was also
establishing a "moderator team".  I would make this explicit.  Suggested
change: s/This memo proposes a consistent approach to moderating the IETF's
    various public fora./This memo proposes a consistent approach to moderating
    the IETF's various public fora and outlines the process for establishing a
    moderator team/

The working group intentionally went the other way on this so as to specifically *not* overemphasize the importance of the moderator team, which is only part of the solution.



Minor issues:
1. Section 2.1: s/IESG must not appoint a moderator who/IESG must not appoint a
moderator an individual who is/

Editorial I prefer the original text.


2. Section 4.2: s/may be made only a year/may
be made no earlier than a year/

I agree that this change clarifies the intent.



Nits/editorial comments:
1. Section 2: s/previous model Appendix B.2 and/previous model (cf. Appendix
B.2) and/

That is an internal reference.

Eliot

Attachment: OpenPGP_0x87B66B46D9D27A33.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to