Re: Qualifying for NomCom

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Fri, 08 April 2016 14:07 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.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 DC70512D903 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 07:07:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 bMHTOZscdNEW for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 07:07:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-x232.google.com (mail-lb0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::232]) (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 0829312D829 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 07:07:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lb0-x232.google.com with SMTP id u8so70064285lbk.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 07:07:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=D1S+ZUvpF1y4NgfexyvNO8JsvspUKEin7pqgsu8OWq0=; b=Q7Ccz+buuwobH772WsDz51WalMovRXbH0KbDd9r96JBbWElDalRugJcVVPv8BzL4Bd DJBdu307LLK5YMrEHKsrtHKksBOm405+bp4pFt2jVx5bw+ce6U/MWK8+DEWZUAu71jJ6 zQClUIgBRj9Q7uwbXXQuS2i+dHgifs+VIDSOalxet/jYFqt0Voaxx3XjkAL2LpigGf5i Sf/fH08kGx50nMcRXicz20d3O0O2VesqVmSBmUzHBM3o3nxX7ZCLhWHQEG55cnq1zgzm sSW6XLQHqlaRRgP6Wq31zz5XfBYpS37LdYa/lWCgjAWHkswEm3MvZ1V9G3b2n5PilRr9 JXDw==
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:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=D1S+ZUvpF1y4NgfexyvNO8JsvspUKEin7pqgsu8OWq0=; b=YKv5Yetr2MXKOdOdtkzwKeyK8rFKzkyROYKdhHtFvnGDAMHy+ZORemmINRfPLilpOJ REmDRiMX1I9BJXTiB8WedboyK1/P/MfZup+EkpMxyiDhmqfQrJrrRUcongTw65V0pP1W YT5+ElFyA9wLp8dwFwuaz0Gqez1cPArditl+/PcKBsdcUDKIiyu8kMB56M+plAWeUTuv wgwj7FM2U42S/L9YuUlJboNN4fCeYMrsDl0kCIw0q95iOnbEr2fI0sgQUZyQNftok3U3 MbMZuqObx7A+ZjAQOdC7s2GHm8MMqisjHoK2fE1wokuOjH+W8W3tkR3FckUfB7P6gmky sTxQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJKdmNq8ML9fLXoRdGne/NYdLsjBJ5rw+jb3J3Nbn15gp4OrrL3UXI5/xm0L7MSaJUGaIpoC3lKPIz0Edg==
X-Received: by 10.112.161.41 with SMTP id xp9mr3712942lbb.133.1460124451160; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 07:07:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.40.136 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Apr 2016 07:06:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [31.133.178.155]
In-Reply-To: <23201.1460124058@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
References: <CAL0qLwY0FuDp5=RMFEhUMtkK=XNDxX2dogvVY7+OSy88jrrvOQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAPt1N1=SYpo-CiHoc07Ukb04Kb1LGV2=BPPyRLUsaqyLM9Hbwg@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwbhYRqw7fXHzYY0=W-CpmeHeDdaZx3z2Qg0cA2aMrmVwg@mail.gmail.com> <CAPt1N1nqmC7NJyg2M6Na8vUj8T-qObO-1gHFEXZzrobb3oOQhA@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwZHGa5OvSmZ=bTd6AWchsm4r=QaJn2nPqD+YjeWPmH9pA@mail.gmail.com> <24691.1460062367@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <5706CC94.3080804@gmail.com> <CAL0qLwYvCpL9wwHL0E33HRbMvcckpad=gV-VYgAomJpCdiSrpg@mail.gmail.com> <5E36120B-6D4E-4C0D-9905-2C698455D395@att.com> <CAL0qLwak6GRDYAcYqdOewoSmRj6DP5ptQKjqXkOedBaHcKC7WA@mail.gmail.com> <60B61524-EFF7-4489-A0C7-AA4A139FEF6C@att.com> <CAL0qLwYDW_zwfdr4-2=r0vt2Cb1wNFm+-aog0Wubu+8PbaYWEw@mail.gmail.com> <6012C604-0922-4582-A505-F7934B5FD903@att.com> <23201.1460124058@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 11:06:51 -0300
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1=VL4AUUJC2fdm-YV33kpHhzd54t3Dx0YBh7q0-=RV1Vw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Qualifying for NomCom
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c26b2a3d5a8f052ff9b7dd
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/fzW34d-vueIf_7MEZLMXByLKs3I>
Cc: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Fri, 08 Apr 2016 14:07:39 -0000

There are some issues here.   First, who can challenge a nomcom volunteer's
elegibility?   Second, what process is followed if their eligibility is
challenged?   This actually seems a lot harder than some of the other
proposals that were put forth, which simply extended eligibility of the
same type to more IETF participants, rather than creating two classes of
IETF participants.

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
wrote:

>
> So, we'll know by August if the experiment resulted in more volunteers.
>
> My only concern is that we decide it was ineffective in getting more
> diverse
> volunteers,  and stop; but it might have needed more than 1 year to
> socialize
> the ideas out there.
>
> A result might also be: the new rules cause no harm and should be kept
> until
> such time we have more data.
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
>
>
>
>