leadership bodily presence requirements (was: Re: Want to be on the IESG?)
Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Thu, 07 October 2021 17:37 UTC
Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
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 EF6EF3A0CC4; Thu, 7 Oct 2021 10:37:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 1-Tbj9A5ZBTq; Thu, 7 Oct 2021 10:37:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 217C73A0CBA; Thu, 7 Oct 2021 10:37:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.51]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A963F54804A; Thu, 7 Oct 2021 19:37:30 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id 986964E9A22; Thu, 7 Oct 2021 19:37:30 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2021 19:37:30 +0200
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, manycouches@ietf.org
Subject: leadership bodily presence requirements (was: Re: Want to be on the IESG?)
Message-ID: <YV8wWvWb4Rz+CSRz@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <C9FBA8D0B5C67204AE60805D@PSB>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <C9FBA8D0B5C67204AE60805D@PSB>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/qNulk-9HyOzdeH60t_XfKKbAfMQ>
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: Thu, 07 Oct 2021 17:37:46 -0000
Just my 2c on one aspect for the discussion about the lacking amount of accepted nominations to leadership position on this years Nomcom process: Maybe i am not reading the right mailing lists, but: I am not aware of any public mailing list discussion as to whether the pre-covid leadership bodily presence requirements should indeed be the requirements going forward. I can observe that at jobs thats delivering a paycheck (aka: not IETF), certain roles where never considered appropriate for full-remote workers and that has changed due to covid. I can also easily see how existing IETF leadership body members themselves would really prefer to return to the old normal, but i am a lot more uncertain if those body members past-experience based preferences should really be the sole leading guidance for our NomCom preferences. Right now they are, aka: NomCom would not accept candidates who would only be able to participate remotely based on those existing body members prescribed preferences. Personally i think that if we do not try even a single-term experiment full-time-telecommuting leadership body member NOW, when it is likely that a lot of normal-in-person-meetings will be remote anyhow, then i am certain that we will not do it EVER - unless we really are forced to continue operate fully remotely much much longer. Of course, the inability to attend sometimes in person may not make much of a difference for a job like IESG where arguably the time commitment is the much more difficult requirement to meet, but IMHO it would be perfectly valid to experiment with full-time-remote IAB membership for example. And outside of NomCom leadership equally for WG chairs. Of course, i am quite biased towards thinking that remote participationship is not a problem if just tooling is good enough; and we have a 30 year history of building protocols, networks, tools an recommendations for it. Do i prefer in-person attendance ? Very much so. But for leadership i would also like to see more diversity, and especially for possible candidates from academia and a more diverse part of the industry that where the candidate but not the sponsor is valuing the IETF engagement, IMHO air travel will become more and more an issue than it was 30..20 years ago, when i think we had more diverse participation (e.g.: more from universities for example). Cheers Toerless
- Want to be on the IESG? Salz, Rich
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Salz, Rich
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Michael Richardson
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Keith Moore
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Keith Moore
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? John C Klensin
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Lloyd W
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Keith Moore
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Andy Ringsmuth
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Salz, Rich
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Salz, Rich
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Salz, Rich
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Lloyd W
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Keith Moore
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Donald Eastlake
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? John C Klensin
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Salz, Rich
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Michael Richardson
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Salz, Rich
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Salz, Rich
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Stephen Farrell
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Salz, Rich
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Salz, Rich
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Stephen Farrell
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? John C Klensin
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Keith Moore
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Stewart Bryant
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Salz, Rich
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Salz, Rich
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Carsten Bormann
- RE: Want to be on the IESG? Ron Bonica
- leadership bodily presence requirements (was: Re:… Toerless Eckert
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Christian Huitema
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Keith Moore
- RE: Want to be on the IESG? Ron Bonica
- What is "The Internet community" ? Re: Want to be… Toerless Eckert
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? John C Klensin
- Re: What is "The Internet community" ? Re: Want t… Keith Moore
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Toerless Eckert
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Keith Moore
- Re: What is "The Internet community" ? Re: Want t… Toerless Eckert
- Re: What is "The Internet community" ? Re: Want t… Keith Moore
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Toerless Eckert
- RE: What is "The Internet community" ? Re: Want t… Ron Bonica
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Lloyd W
- RE: Want to be on the IESG? Ron Bonica
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Carsten Bormann
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Lloyd W
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? John C Klensin
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Carsten Bormann
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? John C Klensin
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Toerless Eckert
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Keith Moore
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Salz, Rich
- Think outside the box - Re: Want to be on the IES… Toerless Eckert
- Re: [Manycouches] Think outside the box - Re: Wan… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Manycouches] Think outside the box - Re: Wan… Toerless Eckert
- Re: [Manycouches] Think outside the box - Re: Wan… Jay Daley
- Re: [Manycouches] Think outside the box - Re: Wan… Toerless Eckert
- Re: Think outside the box - Re: Want to be on the… Lloyd W
- Re: Think outside the box - Re: Want to be on the… Ali Mezgani
- Re: Think outside the box - Re: Want to be on the… Lloyd W
- Re: Think outside the box - Re: Want to be on the… S Moonesamy
- RE: Think outside the box - Re: Want to be on the… Larry Masinter
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Salz, Rich
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: Want to be on the IESG? John C Klensin