Re: [Eligibility-discuss] [Gendispatch] New Version Notification for draft-knodel-nomcom-gender-representation-00.txt

Hi,

On Sat, 25 Nov 2023 at 05:11, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
wrote:

>
> Hi, I sure appreciate how short this document is.
> It seems like a good idea.
>
> I would like the document to deal with what happens if one gets to the end
> of
> the pool and there are still empty slots.
>

There could only be one empty slot due to the gender requirement as I’ve
drafted it. Maybe more because of the company skips, but I don’t see that
BCP text dealing with this. Heck maybe nobody even brought it up at the
time.

But to answer your question:

Then the nomcom is all men. And then when someone like me asks, ‘gee, why
is the nomcom all men?’ someone can say with full confidence that ‘we’ll,
we dredged the entire pool and there wasn’t a single woman or nonbinary
person eligible to be a voting member.’

I view this as a better situation than the one we are currently in, however
marginally.

-M

> While it is unlikely that there would be fewer than 4 people of the
> minority
> gender in the pool *as a whole*, it could be that the limit of 2-per
> company
> has also eliminated quite a number of people.
> (It seems that larger organizations are more likely to present a more
> diverse
> pool of volunteers)
>
> Having a more diverse nomcom will also make it easier to pick nomcom chairs
> in a diverse fashion.   I believe that the ISOC President would like to
> pick
> alternating genders as nomcom chairs, but is hesistant to commit to this
> because of apparent lack of experienced volunteers.
>

> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-                      *I*LIKE*TRAINS*
> --
> Eligibility-discuss mailing list
> Eligibility-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eligibility-discuss
>