Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom ELEGIBILITY

Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> Thu, 12 February 2015 13:44 UTC

Return-Path: <dave@cridland.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D04B31A1B06 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 05:44:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.378
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.378 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 snawAzKpltZg for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 05:44:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-x229.google.com (mail-oi0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9EC8D1A1A96 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 05:44:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi0-f41.google.com with SMTP id z81so3198579oif.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 05:44:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cridland.net; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=nFFOLLkE3WSLgrW9zNnr1qPCg8UNRJ1+p+x7/tWrCwU=; b=V8K8dArvzkYs8nkRgumxNSdX7R3gSeCORjIKQzbwL8dnuMqAK+HOJ/JZqpYtR3OiVZ pJDeusT1gt0WqsF9aQGPxDTyc2vlw3pftK7XhlUkvVMmCmeHJbZAnojWrThoKQLJyAwL WWtWwysuWHdsv+gXtzc/IfMagNZXGCaYcKCS8=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=nFFOLLkE3WSLgrW9zNnr1qPCg8UNRJ1+p+x7/tWrCwU=; b=a5WpfjuUGN/eHSCrncDVJkbeMt5cRyjjmTYOVXfMS6ESOa7Nbi/k1gCTSEtSWKlDY2 +vOlrPhudrp83MjCYQ0mDvl4Qwp4zW/P0kn+4HSFxlxgwi25/ApR0EI0E6u3JFrjEOwp YEGZY3NYP/9xEhgJXqZkqc1fvHPNVujzBEtrN8BTeqDB9/bxAHPAW0K6N0U3HjgwzSJp HnfqbhmbgbCsgPCCCVWdIPmG/Tb+cnkVSQnCxNUeQNIHi/2oKOVKdBkJn0VeXHgdPS0i ht4HS14ZtfKu1Q7kZjnGlqUilMshiutzJAXy1MF6wEyBZTgduwidGDOvXDcqTC9rZRC/ MH8A==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmuoPnHzYdYRa70irynGDiJfIfwpUZySrCDFbR91i13f1QIBaGRB8I0nwTL5loxNx4Ntvlc
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.54.67 with SMTP id d64mr2550658oia.55.1423748659763; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 05:44:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.60.77.71 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 05:44:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.60.77.71 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 05:44:19 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <ADFCF096C3D41BB57971B052@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
References: <CAL0qLwZk=k-CWLte_ChK9f1kzLwMOTRyi7AwFa8fLjBsextBcA@mail.gmail.com> <9772.1420830216@sandelman.ca> <CAL0qLwZatYW2e4Wk6GXB2U26fsCn8BV2qt-07kHBugiq34zrcQ@mail.gmail.com> <04AED0595DF62A6F1013479D@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <54DB5CBE.3070502@dcrocker.net> <54DB66A0.1050006@pi.nu> <BE226640-1857-4232-9D4F-78445D82776A@nominum.com> <ADFCF096C3D41BB57971B052@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:44:19 +0000
Message-ID: <CAKHUCzw=1s2MYhbSfXOrg=Hha3Zw8H1m+x+X69HVsh+xkda8Aw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom ELEGIBILITY
From: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
To: John C Klensin <john@jck.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ce0061d7341050ee451c2
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Ku627KAq6NHu70L7ByfDQRn6h-g>
Cc: "dcrocker@bbiw.net >> Dave Crocker" <dcrocker@bbiw.net>, "ietf@ietf.org Discussion" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:44:23 -0000

On 12 Feb 2015 01:30, "John C Klensin" <john@jck.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> --On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 09:35 -0500 Ted Lemon
> <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> wrote:
>
> > The operation of each nomcom are pretty opaque to those who
> > are not on it.   For those who have interacted with a nomcom
> > as candidates, such an impression might exist.   It's possible
> > that nomcom liaisons or chairs could speak to this.   However,
> > since nomcom proceedings are supposed to be confidential, I
> > don't know how much they could really say.   Because these
> > properties of the nomcom are intentional and useful, it does
> > make sense to be particularly careful about how nomcom
> > eligibility is determined and not just trust to peoples' good
> > natures.
>
> +1
>
> And, again, unless we start changing other things, we really
> aren't just talking about the Nomcom.  We use Nomcom eligibility
> for some other things where "disenfranchised" is more direct
> than being ineligible to volunteer for a pool from which Nomcom
> members are selected at random.

I hesitate to offer my opinion, because I'm not a proper IETF participant,
of course.

I've tended to spend my career working for smaller companies, which simply
cannot send that many people to week long meetings around the world three
times a year, so despite that being the important part of the IETF, I have
had to restrict my participation to minor activities, like engaging on the
mailing lists, authoring standards track documents, serving as a working
group chair, and so on. Obviously such insignificant contributions mean I
cannot possibly understand the implications of being on the NomCom.

Nonetheless, and despite not having any idea of the workings of the IETF, I
would think that John is right in his implication that my having a voice in
the recall of an area director - whatever one of those is - would seem to
have some use.

Dave.