Re: [Eligibility-discuss] Review of draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-06

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]> wrote:
    >> *  Path 3: Has been a listed author of at least 2 IETF stream RFCs
    >> within the last 5 years.  An Internet-Draft that has been approved
    >> by the IESG and is in the RFC Editor queue counts.
    >>
    >> I find this troubling for a few reasons, though I’ll say up front that
    >> I don’t have a suitable alternative that meets the “algorithmis” goal.
    >>
    >> 1. While I understand the reason, as stated in the notes, for making
    >> this 5 years, it seems odd that someone whose name got on a draft 5
    >> years ago becomes NomCom-eligible, while someone who was the working
    >> group chair at the time but stepped down a year later does not.

    > Yes, one could play with this for ever. Maybe we will get enough
    > IETF Last Call inputs to confirm the 5 years or reduce it.

We increased it from 3-years to 5-years for RFC-publication because we felt
3-4 years was a typical cycle time from ID-00 to RFC.  So if someone works on
one document at a time that 3-years might catch them between publication
times.

To me, the question is whether or not we should increase WG chair criteria
from 3-years to 5-years if you want parity.

    >> 3. It’s often the case that people listed in a Contributors section
    >> have been more active participants (and had more to do with shaping
    >> the document) than some of those listed on the front page.

    > That's true, but Contributors sections are relatively rare. Our goal
    > here is surely to have a big enough pool, not to collect every possible
    > name.

I'd really like to encourage the contributors section to always use the
available structure so that we can, going forward, collect that information
mechanically.  Then, we could collect some data.

--
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide