Re: I-D Action: draft-kucherawy-nomcom-procexp-00.txt

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Sat, 09 April 2016 21:14 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 95BE412D150 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Apr 2016 14:14:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 eBVlJh6tvZ62 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Apr 2016 14:14:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C18712D198 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 9 Apr 2016 14:14:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4127C2009E; Sat, 9 Apr 2016 17:18:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E7A463755; Sat, 9 Apr 2016 17:14:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-kucherawy-nomcom-procexp-00.txt
In-Reply-To: <570882CE.9010501@gmail.com>
References: <20160408185636.23101.86017.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <570882CE.9010501@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.4.2
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2016 17:14:46 -0400
Message-ID: <13214.1460236486@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/on64B57WmzQYk2SU9Q4fAWaiQoE>
Cc: IETF discussion list <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: Sat, 09 Apr 2016 21:14:49 -0000

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
    > I think this is too general and judgmental. Suggestion:

    > 3.  A new reason to challenge a selection is that a specific member
    > who has not attended three of the last five meetings of the IETF
    > does not have enough recent participation of any kind to be an
    > effective member of the NomCom.  Such a challenge must be
    > accompanied by a specific explanation of why the challenger
    > considers this to be the case.

Is this challenge public?
I think that it is, but I'm not certain if all of it is public.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-