Re: List of volunteers for the 2021-2022 NomCom

[Mary B <[e-mail]>]

Unfortunately, I have to agree with Joel.  I too forwarded the email to a
list of folks that I really thought should consider volunteering and don't
see that had much impact at all.

Mary.

On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 2:54 PM Joel M. Halpern <[e-mail]> wrote:

> While I agree we probably have the time to reopen it, we can't just
> decide to do so.  We can't simply change the procedures because we want
> to (particularly note when "we" is some vocal subset of the community.)
>
> As far as I can tell from the rules we have adopted, we have to leave
> the rules as written and run the selection.  Meanwhile, we would have to
> race to write an I-D, get community rough consensus on it, and get it
> approved by the IESG, all before the random number selection that is
> mandated (since otherwise we would be changing the random result AFTER
> knowing it.)  Given our history for process changes of any kind, I just
> don't see it.  (I am not even sure the various mandatory time lines
> would permit it.)
>
> Look folks, I am not happy with the lack of diversity.  But the solution
> to that was to get folks to volunteer.  I didn't push as hard as I
> should have. Probably because I do not htink chair pushing helps much.
> But I did forward the announcement to remind folks.  To all three of my
> working groups.  I doubt it mattered.
>
> Yours,
> Joel
>
>
> On 6/27/2021 2:27 PM, Andrew Campling wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > Re-opening the volunteering window for a week or two would seem like a
> > reasonable step to take – if the numbers don’t change then that’s on us
> > and not the organisations of the current pool of volunteers.
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> > *From:*Allison Mankin <[e-mail]>
> > *Sent:* 27 June 2021 16:25
> > *To:* Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>
> > *Cc:* Michael StJohns <[e-mail]>; Stewart Bryant
> > <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
> > *Subject:* Re: List of volunteers for the 2021-2022 NomCom
> >
> > +1 to Michael's point. We've had the most diverse nomcoms when the pool
> > has been over 200. I'd like to see the volunteering reopened
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 11:18 Michael Richardson <[e-mail]
> > <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> >
> >     Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]
> >     <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> >          > This has provided a statistical basis for my conclusion on
> >     initially
> >          > seeing this list. I imagine I am not alone.
> >
> >          > This Nomcom volunteer pool is insufficiently diverse.
> >
> >     I mostly agree.
> >
> >     I don't have numbers for years before last, but my recollection is
> >     that it's
> >     usually closer to 200, often a bit over.
> >
> >          > I think the chair needs to extend the time to volunteer and
> >     encourage a
> >          > more diverse pool.
> >
> >          > Normally the timeline is set by a need to physically meet at
> >     the summer
> >          > IETF, but that does not apply this year so there is more time
> >     to make
> >          > the selection.
> >
> >     I don't know if that's the right thing to do, and I'm not convinced
> that
> >     we'll get more volunteers this way.  But, I don't really object to
> >     trying.
> >
> >     --
> >     ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh
> >     networks [
> >     ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT
> >     architect   [
> >     ] [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> >     http://www.sandelman.ca/ <http://www.sandelman.ca/>        |   ruby
> >     on rails    [
> >
>
>