Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom ELEGIBILITY

["Murray S. Kucherawy" <[e-mail]>]

On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Allison Mankin <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> I like Michael's original suggestion that there should be two meetings in
> the last five and if there is not a third, then meeting some other
> requirement, a choice of things like attended lots of past meetings, has a
> defined role in a wg, ...
>
> Others have noted this, but the two important goals of these criteria are:
>
> Has attained a (minimal)  level of familiarity with IETF
>
> Has a probability of attending in person for the Nomcom activities
>
> Michael has crystallized in other posts the fact that Nomcom really needs
> the in person time in order to work together, and IETF teally, critically
> needs full attendance if Nomcom during the meeting(s) with interviews,
> especially November, for the candidate interviews.
>
Having served on the last two NomComs, I have to say I agree with these
points, especially the in-person one.  NomCom would be pretty hard to do
remotely.  I know we're making great strides in remote participation in
working groups, but those are very open things while NomCom is not.
There's a lot of value in being available just walking around the hallways
when serving as a NomCom member, something that can't be done quite as
easily when you're far away.

-MSK