Re: NomCom eligibility & IETF 107

[Nico Williams <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 12:25:35AM -0400, Barry Leiba wrote:
> The IESG has discussed what the best way is to handle a decision for
> eligibility for the 2020/21 NomCom, given the timeframe involved and the
> discussions that are already happening.
> 
> 1. We are concerned that a normal process for discussing a draft,
> conducting a last call, and approving a BCP would take too long.

But earlier you wrote:

| If you haven't already weighed in on this, please post your comment
|here, in this thread on <[e-mail]>, by 30 April 2020.

That's... four weeks.  You don't have to get the BCP published, just
approved, and four weeks is enough time, isn't it?

> 2. We are concerned that rushing such a process by, for example, posting a
> draft now and immediately last-calling it without a normal period of
> discussion would call into question the legitimacy of our consensus process

A last call *is* a normal period of discussion.  Sure, there would be no
preceding discussion, but that's OK -- the minimum time is 4 weeks, and
you've got 28 days + two to spare.

> and would set a bad precedent.  We also note that have already stated that
> we’d like community comments by 30 April, and we are concerned about
> cutting that time short in order to write such a draft.
> 
> 4. We believe the IESG does have — and must have — the latitude to address
> exceptional situations such as this and to make exceptions to our
> processes.  At the same time, we appreciate and agree with concerns about
> overstepping, and we agree that maintaining accountability and appropriate
> checks and balances is important.

Perhaps, but it's much better not to even require a debate about that
and follow the standard process.

> The IESG, therefore, plans to continue collecting input and evaluating the
> community’s rough consensus about the immediate NomCom-eligibility question
> through 30 April, as stated.  We will then post a statement and inform the
> ISOC Board of Trustees, as we would do with a process BCP.  That statement
> will serve as the basis for eligibility to serve on this year’s NomCom, and
> this year’s only; it will NOT remain in effect beyond that brief timeframe,
> and will make that aspect clear.

If the input collection happens on the [e-mail] list, then how is
this different from running an actual IETF Last Call?

> If rough consensus of the community is that it is important for the IESG’s
> decision to be published as a BCP, we will do so, handling that after the
> immediate need for a quick decision has passed and making the publication
> for archival purposes.

You can do it all in a single last call.

Are you concerned that the LC would be inconclusive?

> We also encourage the community to continue and complete the two efforts
> that have been started, to formally define an exception process, and to
> update NomCom eligibility requirements to account for virtual meetings and
> for remote participation.

Sure.

Nico
--