IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Eligibility-discuss] Suggestions for nomcom chair selection?

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 09 September 2020 21:07 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: eligibility-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: eligibility-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 908D83A0E77 for <eligibility-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 14:07:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MpPLBMnSXl6Z for <eligibility-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 14:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A71C13A0E76 for <eligibility-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 14:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A342389CD for <eligibility-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 16:46:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id dwgP-bvCbaCM for <eligibility-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 16:46:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14B0B389CB for <eligibility-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 16:46:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEA31553 for <eligibility-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 17:07:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: eligibility-discuss@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <9cebc2cb-656e-23ba-3e0f-996ed97de825@nthpermutation.com>
References: <20200814192145.iiuoma7a3frf7mm7@crankycanuck.ca> <006801d672e1$3a7989a0$af6c9ce0$@olddog.co.uk> <20200909180148.lr6ra2kgpsp3b4js@crankycanuck.ca> <9cebc2cb-656e-23ba-3e0f-996ed97de825@nthpermutation.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2020 17:07:42 -0400
Message-ID: <16328.1599685662@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/eligibility-discuss/sVJvciwySi63C803SZPVtvpIhV0>
Subject: Re: [Eligibility-discuss] Suggestions for nomcom chair selection?
X-BeenThere: eligibility-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <eligibility-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/eligibility-discuss>, <mailto:eligibility-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/eligibility-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:eligibility-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:eligibility-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eligibility-discuss>, <mailto:eligibility-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2020 21:07:53 -0000

Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com> wrote:
    > As I was re-reading this thread, I came up with a fairly strange idea.

    > Let's let the Nomcom select the next Nomcom chair, with the approval of the
    > IAB and IESG.

    > Minimum ( non-waivable) qualifications:  Must have served on the Nomcom
    > within the last 6 years (not including the current one). Must not have served
    > as chair within the last 10. Must have at least 2 up votes  (recommendations)
    > from people (voting members?) who were on their same Nomcom.  Must not be
    > working for the same company as any of the previous 5 chairs were when they
    > served as chairs.  (Each of those numbers is arbitrary - can be twiddled for
    > balance - here just as a suggested starting point)

I think that this might be overconstrained, but I certainly like the idea.

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
    >> with the approval of
    >> the IAB and IESG.

    > No, I don't think so. That's a bit too close to self-perpetuation.
    > Stick to confirmation & announcement by the ISOC President, with
    > some words that allow the latter to push back if they see a problem.

Agreed.

    > Alternatively: Leave it with the ISOC President, but with an advisory
    > committee consisting of (say) the last 3 NomCom chairs.

Well, Andrew hasn't asked for my advice, but Kathy certainly did, so
in effect I suspect this is really already happening.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email