Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom ELEGIBILITY

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

John C Klensin <[e-mail]> wrote:
    > The other remote participation issue that would need to be sorted out
    > for Nomcom eligibility and service is that my impression is that the
    > Nomcom depends a lot on f2f or at least on having enough members
    > present at key meetings to staff interviews, etc.  "Has been
    > participating remotely, but can promise to physically attend several
    > meetings in a row if selected" would be a rather different requirement
    > from "Has been participating remotely and intends to participate
    > remotely in the Nomcom".  Michael and others who have been more
    > directly involved might want to reflect on that difference and the
    > feasibility of the second, but that might evolve with remote
    > participation arrangements too and I'm pretty sure we aren't ready to
    > make decisions about it now.

I, and a number of others (Melinda and Joe Abley comes to mind. Joe and I
stayed up all night once trying to make mbone work for us...), throughout the 
naughties, attended around a single meeting a year...

-- 
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [ 
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network architect  [ 
]     [e-mail]  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [