Re: Will {history}?

Carl Malamud <carl@malamud.com> Mon, 09 November 1992 14:26 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14810; 9 Nov 92 9:26 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14799; 9 Nov 92 9:26 EST
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa25371; 9 Nov 92 9:27 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14755; 9 Nov 92 9:26 EST
Received: from trystero.malamud.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa25355; 9 Nov 92 9:26 EST
Received: by malamud.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA21935; Mon, 9 Nov 92 09:32:48 EST
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 09:32:48 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Carl Malamud <carl@malamud.com>
Message-Id: <9211091432.AA21935@malamud.com>
To: bsimpson@angband.stanford.edu, poised@CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Subject: Re: Will {history}?

Bill -

Good comments.

We didn't address the appointment of working group chairs as this
is something that the Technical Task Force can do once the structure
is in place.  Rather than open up yet another can of worms, we asked
ourselves if the model we propose can handle situations like that.
If so, no need to put the issue into the bootstrap document.

I don't think single-year terms is really a good thing.  We want to
select our leaders, but they should then have enough time to grow into
their position and then exercise leadership.  Having terms staggered
provides enough responsiveness to the membership without turning
individuals into short-term politicians instead of long-term
technical leaders.

Does this make sense?

Carl