IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: NomCom procedures revision

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Wed, 26 August 2015 00:36 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
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 634871A8A94 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 17:36:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 pgJniFdssET1 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 17:36:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6424D1A8AA1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 17:36:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1ZUOhb-0003Y1-6R; Wed, 26 Aug 2015 00:36:31 +0000
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:36:29 +0900
Message-ID: <m237z6zy0i.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: NomCom procedures revision
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwYddoztoZvzT93t=55hJnKGhvMB77YjkLp+UbaTN_npYw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL0qLwYJzFZT=OgWqiiTw-n6mvb3PPusRtArmPs_d4_qpLfmpg@mail.gmail.com> <9F0F20D4-BAFE-4C7D-BCB2-86342C5820ED@cursive.net> <CAL0qLwYddoztoZvzT93t=55hJnKGhvMB77YjkLp+UbaTN_npYw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/U5iJ6dtj6Uh3kQRSYKDsZsnSlfY>
Cc: IETF Disgust Where Overthinging are Us <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: <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: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 00:36:34 -0000

> Coming to consensus on revised NomCom qualification seemed to be the
> one issue where there were lots of ideas but not much agreement.  The
> expired draft captures one such idea but I wouldn't go so far as to
> claim it had any kind of consensus at all.

then leave the rules we have today and we can separately discuss
changing it for at least two years.

maybe add a clause to the effect that those who post more than two
messages complicating or disagreeing are disqualified to serve.  :)

randy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email