Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom ELEGIBILITY

Stephen Farrell <> Fri, 09 January 2015 19:26 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF0061A9250 for <>; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 11:26:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oA1EGWopCx7V for <>; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 11:26:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8FF251A924E for <>; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 11:26:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07C8ABF09; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 19:26:13 +0000 (GMT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3qll9ZrHzHXy; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 19:26:11 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [] (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DBDBCBF07; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 19:26:11 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 19:26:09 +0000
From: Stephen Farrell <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Michael Richardson <>, ietf <>
Subject: Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom ELEGIBILITY
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 19:26:17 -0000

Hash: SHA1

On 09/01/15 19:03, Michael Richardson wrote:
> So I would keep the 3/5 in-person meetings to *become* nomcom 
> eligible.
> Once eligible, the rules for remaining eligible would be
> different.

I like that.

Given that remote participation is likely to continue changing
and hopefully improving in the coming years, if we do go down
this road I think it'd be good to figure some way to allow the
rules for continued eligibility to be changed without having
to update the BCP. That could be a task given to the IESG or
someone other I* group or the current nomcom could set the rule
for the next. I don't care which of those, but maybe the last
would be best, as nomcom members may know best what's needed,
(though some form of appeal against a nomcom getting themselves
all back next year would be needed:-)

Also, if we go there then I'd prefer that we apply that new
rule retrospectively as well so folks who were ever nomcom
eligible could "re-establish" that via participation any time.
(Unless that caused some tooling problem in checking
eligibility after someone volunteers.)


Version: GnuPG v1