Re: [Pesci-discuss] Re: Fw: Last NomCom 2005/06 Call for Volunteers

Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca> Sun, 09 October 2005 20:18 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EOhd7-0006Rv-Sv; Sun, 09 Oct 2005 16:18:45 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EOhd6-0006Rq-P5 for pesci-discuss@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 09 Oct 2005 16:18:44 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA07272 for <pesci-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 9 Oct 2005 16:18:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from cod.sandelman.ca ([192.139.46.139] helo=lists.sandelman.ca) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EOhmp-0005Gu-O8 for pesci-discuss@ietf.org; Sun, 09 Oct 2005 16:28:50 -0400
Received: from sandelman.ottawa.on.ca (desk.marajade.sandelman.ca [205.150.200.247]) by lists.sandelman.ca (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j99KID803298 (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168 bits) verified OK); Sun, 9 Oct 2005 16:18:19 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from marajade.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca (marajade [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ottawa.on.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17A89E9955; Sun, 9 Oct 2005 16:17:43 -0400 (EDT)
To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Subject: Re: [Pesci-discuss] Re: Fw: Last NomCom 2005/06 Call for Volunteers
In-Reply-To: Message from Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> of "Sun, 09 Oct 2005 20:48:09 +0200." <6BA7142EDC3EC069047016EE@gloppen.hjemme.alvestrand.no>
References: <103f01c5c8f8$61dd8800$0500a8c0@china.huawei.com> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0510041853310.24109@netcore.fi> <v0fyray5gk.fsf@marajade.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca> <6BA7142EDC3EC069047016EE@gloppen.hjemme.alvestrand.no>
X-Mailer: MH-E 7.82; nmh 1.1; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 17)
Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 16:17:43 -0400
Message-ID: <6262.1128889063@marajade.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca>
From: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: e8a67952aa972b528dd04570d58ad8fe
Cc: pesci-discuss@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: pesci-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Process Evolution Study Committee of the IETF discussion <pesci-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss>, <mailto:pesci-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/pesci-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:pesci-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pesci-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss>, <mailto:pesci-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: pesci-discuss-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: pesci-discuss-bounces@ietf.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----


>>>>> "Harald" == Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> writes:
    >> There is a further bias --- tight travel budgets in the past
    >> years have meant that the lower IETF meeting numbers mean fewer
    >> are actually elible for nomcom.
    >> 
    >> I buy would like to see the nomcom eligibility guidelines changed
    >> a bit.  Perhaps if you qualified at some point in the past for
    >> nomcom, that it changes your future elibility criteria.

    Harald> I don't think the number of eligible people has dropped very
    Harald> much - and we just changed it from "2 out of 3" to "3 out of
    Harald> 5", which stretches the period a bit.

  That's not my point.
  My point is that if you couldn't travel, you become ineligible.
  It's hard to know if our pool of people is going up/down, because we
don't really know what our total population is.
  I think that the secretariat has numbers as to how many are eligible
for nomcom each time?

    Harald> I wouldn't want to have nomcom people who'd been completely
    Harald> out of touch for the last year or more.... and meeting
    Harald> attendance is the only objective measure we've come up
    Harald> with....

  I'm suggesting a more complex measure. For instance, I'm thinking:

      You are not eligible until you have been to 3 of 5 consecutive
      meetings.	  (this makes sure that you have some exposure to the culture)
      
      You remain eligible if your score is >4 (? >5) on the sum of:
	  1) number of meetings in past 9 (?12)
	  2) number of groups you chaired in past 9 meetings
	  3) number of (unique?) internet-drafts you submitted to WG
	     areas.

  Can you imagine being a WG chair without attending a meeting for a
year?  Yes, I can.  A WG that is *trying* to push final documents
through (so it can close), is not meeting, may actually have VERY
RELEVANT input as to recent state of affairs.

- -- 
]       ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine.           |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson,    Xelerance Corporation, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] mcr@xelerance.com      http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/mcr/ |device driver[
] panic("Just another Debian GNU/Linux using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [
    



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Finger me for keys

iQCVAwUBQ0l65IqHRg3pndX9AQEz/QP+OsGv0Z875r/ogHbNx94JgpU+9HOhGjvD
u1DgEEXTQIK+E2ep5y1BhIPHhCsVHHByijOKKkc3U34uoLyldQTB8gf/ct+At8OT
SuUasU2Mi8lSuKyh6sua5LO/KSte/0zQT7TXeB5fQZpAvhf6XjdUAr6TyCKP721M
1CyiSstmVrQ=
=0tR2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Pesci-discuss mailing list
Pesci-discuss@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss