IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Eligibility-discuss] enfranchising mostly-remote participants

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 28 October 2019 15:13 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 C9602120850 for <eligibility-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 08:13:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 QQojcxr7Wb5u for <eligibility-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 08:13:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2907A12081D for <eligibility-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 08:13:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id E49033897C; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 11:10:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95E943BF0; Mon, 28 Oct 2019 11:13:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
cc: "eligibility-discuss@ietf.org" <eligibility-discuss@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <A7577125-8E9F-46E9-8918-F1197B521208@akamai.com>
References: <19743.1572014559@localhost> <A7577125-8E9F-46E9-8918-F1197B521208@akamai.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
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-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 11:13:05 -0400
Message-ID: <30298.1572275585@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/eligibility-discuss/z3aCsEU-3B_nTMeCiC3loZxY9-Y>
Subject: Re: [Eligibility-discuss] enfranchising mostly-remote participants
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: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 15:13:09 -0000

Salz, Rich <rsalz@akamai.com> wrote:
    > How often do nomcom seats need to be filled during its term?  My
    > intuition is that this is not a case worth designing for, but having
    > real numbers would help.

Do you mean, how often do IESG seats need to be filled during a nomcom-term,
or do you mean, how often do NOMCOM members need to be replaced?

There is a provision for the nomcom to continue with 9 people should a member
become unavailable, because replacing them would take too long and there
would be too much to brief them on.  Some have suggested selecting 11 people
"just in case"

(Nomcom member: 2003, 2012, 2013, chair 2014)

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email