Re: NomCom 2019 Call for Community Feedback

Tim Wicinski <> Mon, 04 November 2019 23:38 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4D7B120131 for <>; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 15:38:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VS4269g3Xd-3 for <>; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 15:38:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECBD9120090 for <>; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 15:38:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id l20so3750258oie.10 for <>; Mon, 04 Nov 2019 15:38:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=PvILYyE2YDzSegFO04Njx80biNzRswS42RTfQj5cPl8=; b=heNWAsogPmLC185frYlv78k4EsPoGY8WGGcFu54R6duaTFv6cCFZBVPuFJ4NuNmDcL kvU/AY8TZfw4xmztxm32lV5sZeOUKRb4kwW3XoZRR52Mg10YLy8go44zQROr+PiAVbiX d+ANb6Tl2FBfjTe1ydlxJpQElXaXQE/CS7ZakSKCeNxwc61Ybgneu3hElSReF1tHIoPf XWvJkltJCBAaLT0+R+IUbR0oft2bJAcdhM3oqhkNd6USRl/8UWq77zn4GJlx4yX0KGEp X4c/jB4Aln8IXvPNAUNj6piDrBtYvTVcGGyPrnQWLfmkxpmF3zbVebMLGB9YF2Raexc2 t7qw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PvILYyE2YDzSegFO04Njx80biNzRswS42RTfQj5cPl8=; b=gSGbZBudcmV8swIpqDyqBodxqccnipj9anM9QdWB0jC1ptedR6nu+EIdFXZVxWoYW7 QNzn2rCma1r5r2k1oF3uRFg7bi6qriAYicKFFmkJ/F64r7Lx3edi+q7S8aXQtR5fx5Lm UF1+XF6z+/OdCvo5S464GBo0UM7VjWrlxI0XUsbozRHVGlsNnMxPJuahpmR2vtu0C0ve xAa67JYcJOQD54CcIwDHiukuBKfulsvJvexwu2kP8ehs8D5l/f0yqbYpcWZyD7i1nv5u yNGN56axx9b+nihy0Ql8aGM3lM9UPpC2dGC8TPjPZhMmCO2+wCW5F6nSWIsHtomkd/DG 8sRQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWUOp2o9x1QGAstubUB9bXu5xoH9k3p/3cV5ZO/iYks42aaymHe LGYwwS1+frsh0MJbjrVM0SbGMhcsPUU30rAoh8E=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwwxCu5j+jbI/GK0i+7Y+v11qlx4tuXUgpTaDntrNAbhIHQ2nGm8/fJIK2fcbEJ2d9gzOGIf9v333syVnQkACA=
X-Received: by 2002:aca:484e:: with SMTP id v75mr1416026oia.6.1572910690248; Mon, 04 Nov 2019 15:38:10 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Tim Wicinski <>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 18:37:59 -0500
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: NomCom 2019 Call for Community Feedback
To: Keith Moore <>
Cc: IETF Rinse Repeat <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f4ab7905968dceac"
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2019 23:38:13 -0000

A Working Group chair role also have very tangible results to employers.
They see the work we help shepherd and
it feels their corporate hearts with warmth.  I also like chairing working
groups - the interactions are much more personable
and enjoyable. I like to think I am OK at it.  But I also like working and
I can move in and out.

An AD job looks and feels like middle management. I feel I would do a
horrible job at it.
I've always been lucky to have great ADs but I feel my role is to make
their jobs easier however possible.


On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 6:17 PM Keith Moore <>

> On 11/4/19 2:54 PM, Salz, Rich wrote:
> > I wonder what people think would break if we moved to 5 AD's per area,
> and they could divide the WG's and IESG concalls amongst themselves?
> I suspect it would mean that there'd be more ADs looking for nits to
> pick in order to delay documents.
> Note: I DO NOT think that ADs see their purpose in picking nits or
> delaying documents.   But I do think there's a tendency for people in
> any position to, perhaps subconsciously, try to "prove their worth", and
> I suspect that having a lot more ADs would create perverse incentives.
> ADs do tend to be overloaded.   Sometimes, IMO, it's because there is a
> lack of political will (and/or community support) to push back against
> new WGs that lack the energy or the clue to be doing what they propose
> to do.    Sometimes, IMO, it's because IETF has a longstanding Bad Habit
> of trying to mask tussles by spinning up lots of narrowly focused WGs
> with non-overlapping scope.
> But mostly, IMO, ADs are overloaded because we're trying to use
> volunteers to do what should be paid positions with limited terms.
> Keith