Re: NomCom eligibility & IETF 107

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Fri, 13 March 2020 13:57 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37C1F3A07D3 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:57:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
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 qQ8I0nyddH0W for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:57:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:2a03:6000:1004:1::68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7618D3A07F9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:57:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48f6h72NfZzG6p; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:57:11 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1584107831; bh=XBaWN3WMOIGKMtpbrgeYkY8NziYtLseKaKKkDfGNIwc=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=E52qJUA+SIWyWAQuApPxfIxgnkNHwagA7rLfRQW9IeQTggoiZy/5mrMND8EwO97JF zhc75P2qq4NVqG3t/JnieZX7JuSce9HnHXL2T6s90kFYxz0rCzpaL0QFOhYoQDyRfz 6s8uYvDgMuNDwuV3zxu0HJwm3LmPj1IzHBVC6uhM=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6cIJa-FQiDUt; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:57:10 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [76.10.157.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:57:10 +0100 (CET)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 51DBB6029BA6; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 09:57:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50CFD82C6C; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 09:57:09 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 09:57:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: NomCom eligibility & IETF 107
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJ+kFVXrVAkYLaO6MaPqDA29MzXhVFcxG0c6hZcBs-LqnQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.2003130956090.13795@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <CALaySJ+kFVXrVAkYLaO6MaPqDA29MzXhVFcxG0c6hZcBs-LqnQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Kan19jstA2xcfzDCeadIuoDFKWA>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:57:22 -0000

On Fri, 13 Mar 2020, Barry Leiba wrote:

> One choice is to entirely ignore 107 for the purposes of NomCom
> eligibility.  The last five meetings would then be 106, 105, 104, 103,
> and 102, and one would have had to attend three of those to be
> eligible this year.

This makes sense to me.

> Another choice is to consider 107 to be a meeting that everyone has
> attended

This makes no sense to me.

Paul