Re: [Eligibility-discuss] NomCom selection Fwd: Notification for draft-eastlake-rfc3797bis-00.txt

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 6:59 AM Salz, Rich <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I'm not sure that this is in fact the consensus of those who have been
>
> in nomcom. For instance, I've been liaison twice, and I don't agree.
>
>
>
> That is a good point.  I’m not aware that any full NomCom has ever been
> asked that.
>
>
>
> Perhaps you mean "those who have been nomcom chair", but I'm not sure
>
> that that's really the relevant constituency for this decision, which,
> after all,
>
> is about community legitimacy, rather than minimizing work for the chair.
>
>
>
> Sure, it should be the community consensus
>

Yes, there should be community consensus on the procedure, but I'm saying
something
different, which is that the purpose of the exercise is to have communify
confidence in the
selection process.


.  But I do take exception to your ending phrase. I never once said “this
> is easier for me.”  The only issue I ever raised was the time it would
> take, and the impact on the schedule. In fact, I was quite diligent about
> performing all the steps should I have come
>
to that.
>

Fair enough, I apologize.

-Ekr