Re: List of volunteers for the 2020-2021 NomCom

Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> Tue, 30 June 2020 16:13 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
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 9CBEF3A0BD8 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 09:13:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.397
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=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 v2_LFwAgyo21 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 09:13:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-f44.google.com (mail-ot1-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44]) (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 BADE23A0B95 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 09:13:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-f44.google.com with SMTP id t18so6043998otq.5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 09:13:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=uJA8nm0W11PPXIddiVH3/U/cw+8O6JrvP/6Lav2+EME=; b=pQvoESFY4WTSTR+inwWf+4qdbrF1oqMbwM+QI72sNnLRCd5DiuQkOcK3zgpLC+Lfds L528dycZVLdO1Vi2rqhC1EyJyW1e+CnnC7Hf8E49rEl8wDfiSgg9ibm3PzTnAM8G6dLe FRY1gkL2x/by0bEvb+i9FdWPO8iEodlMSQmJM8BfAzrXFDnuhQH5M+XyQK2ljXC/ZmHX 13Q+KLic99N6SgxFvWLXcnwr50rKTyhMPqWkfGuBdvRXEQvYk29AX0G7ZDDQdzc/BDJi swMNEQ7MCLF5oc3F82qvJvTEikmf5DxmD1H3SfOWVKSWIkjLRQ3y3sh5nP7z+ndbV/Qb xfuw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531hn01egeS8dXMsIFI+1FHi/lQQUlpWur/+BlFrgjnKrBRmer5W E2fbuuMOr3IXRxXb8iAMUSelPhynuCJZuBo7WAA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx+k/74bSkzeGISltTyr7V/9CWhtN65D8aDb34LbAvtocw4+E1onMAdWO6N+CyZZIJMKcKDgDbeNqA0f0Xlc4k=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:14c5:: with SMTP id t5mr18052451otq.64.1593533610070; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 09:13:30 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAA=duU2MerL3=4xz0raNqhD5XSpwRHeWnD_BV54hruGyvcAJDQ@mail.gmail.com> <35DA8337-2601-4CF1-8567-BEFFE68909D6@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <35DA8337-2601-4CF1-8567-BEFFE68909D6@gmail.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:13:19 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwjghA8yiNae0Nthc8PZ58y7tTqT-_bdmRR5feetkNEZSw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: List of volunteers for the 2020-2021 NomCom
To: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
Cc: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c41a7605a94f74b4"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/a9TopFKjCtHVgCWN-SgSPrj33zU>
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: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 16:13:34 -0000

My take on the affiliation rule is substantially different. I see it more
as a protection for the members of the NOMCON.

To have three employees appointed to NOMCON, it is overwhelmingly likely
that a company had a large number of people volunteer which means that they
have a large number attending IETFs. So either they are an entryist faction
(see Sick Puppies / Worldcon) or they are doing a lot of IETF work in which
case they likely have a lot of employees being considered for IESG and IAB.

Now consider the case in which the X-co dominated NOMCON chooses the X-co
employee over someone else in a contentious position. They are going to be
accused of doing it because they are biased. Or maybe they decide not to
out of concern that they are accused of bias.

A preponderance of members from one company creates a no win position for
all the NOMCON members and it should therefore be avoided.