Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom ELEGIBILITY

[Melinda Shore <[e-mail]>]

On 2/13/15 8:44 AM, Dave Cridland wrote:
> Moreover, if you accept that the word "culture" is effectively
> indistinguishable to outsiders from the term "status quo" (though the
> intent is obviously different), it's really quite revealing. All this
> "preserving the culture" talk comes out in an entirely different light.

I think this is a really important comment.  I mean,
*really* important comment.

But it also seems to me pretty clear that the culture
is changing, anyway, and it's one of those things that
I expect most people know without addressing it directly.
I don't think meetings were so heavily emphasized 10
years ago, although that's subjective and could be wrong.
We've now got a very large number of people participating
whose primary job function is to create standards, and
that's caused some changes because their incentives are
different from those whose job it is to create products
or technology.  I don't know how long it's been since
running code was a significant adjunct to the work being
done in the IETF, but I think it's been quite awhile.
So these cultural shifts are taking place anyway, and
they are not being "managed."  Some are good, some are not.
I do think that the increased significance of meetings
in IETF participation (and here, I'm not talking about
things like nomcom but about significance to our technical
work) is a problem, both because it tends to marginalize
people who can't come to meetings and because it slows
work down.

Melinda