Re: draft-sullivan-nomcom-chair-select-00

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

Andrew Sullivan <[e-mail]> wrote:
    > I write with my job hat on.  I'm employed by the Internet Society.

    > Part of my job here is to select the NomCom Chair.  I've been
    > uncomfortable about how that has worked in the past, and more than a
    > year ago I said I'd write a new process.  I failed at that goal, but
    > it's a new year so I've finally written this.  It's at
    > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sullivan-nomcom-chair-select/.

I read your document.    Who would approve this document after review?

I agree that it doesn't contradict anything that has been in the past.
I really can't judge how having an open list will affect things.
I'm not sure it will improve things, but I'm also not convinced it will have
an easily observable negative effect.  I see a long thread about this, which
I have avoided reading as yet.

What I noticed is that your document did not do is specify any kind of timeline.

Allison and later I, when Kathryn was new, tried to have the new nomcom chair
selected prior to the November meeting, rather than around the March meeting.
The idea was that the new chair ("chair-elect") could be invited by the
existing cmte to observe and learn.   There were objections to this that it
turned a ~20 month appointment (March year 1 to November year 2 as
past-chair),  into a ~25 month appointment (November year 0 to November year 2).
I felt that this wasn't that big a deal:  most of the November/April year 0/1
time would be idle, and the learning curve would be so much softer that it
would not be a problem.

Of course, appointing someone who was a voting member in year 0 (as I was,
for instance), makes it much easier for everyone.

Another thing that I think is important is for the ISOC or LLC to have a
bit more funds to support the nomcom chair.  The secretariat already tries to
comp/uprade the nomcom chair's room at the hotel if they can, but this is an
informal arrangement.   It would be nice if the travel and IETF fee could be
formally included.  Food isn't an issue: the nomcom gets overfed :-)
I don't think that the nomcom's time can easily be compensated, so I would
avoid that.  But at least, that would open the pool of available people a
bit.

    > foil that.  But similarly I am not willing to create an entirely new
    > consultative body (or new job for an existing consultative body)
    > without the community saying so.  This document is merely an outline
    > of how I plan to execute my duties as they're already defined.

The only real thing that could work would be for a previous nomcom to
select/voluntold/etc. one of their members for next year.

--
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide