Re: I-D Action: draft-rsalz-termlimits-00.txt

[Mary B <[e-mail]>]

Exactly.   The Nomcom can't make good decisions unless we get good feedback
from the community and in my experience a small percentage of the community
provides feedback.  We've had many discussions as to how this list doesn't
necessarily reflect overall community consensus, so Nomcom should not be
expected to consider this as input to the process (IMHO).

My personal opinion (Nomcom voting member hat off) is that If we actually
had lots of volunteers for these positions, then I'd absolutely support the
notion of ensuring folks didn't move from IESG to IAB (which is the most
common path I think) and so forth.  However, we don't have sufficient
resources in the community that are willing and able to serve in these
roles as is IMHO.  This will only make that problem worse.  And,
personally, I think we had two  great IETF chairs that each served 3
terms.  So, it's not clear to me we're solving a real problem with these
proposals.

Regards,
Mary.

On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 3:44 PM Adrian Farrel <[e-mail]> wrote:

> > *Guidance* to NomCom along these lines would be a fine idea
>
> If only we had some way of telling NomCom how we feel about candidates and
> appointments.
>
> Adrian
>
>