And why did XMPP leave IETF process in the first place?
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 7:27 AM, Dave Cridland<dave(_at_)cridland(_dot_)net>
wrote:
On Wed Jun 10 16:32:37 2009, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
A more useful change would be to abolish NOMCON and for those
currently qualified to sit on NOMCON to elect the IAB and ADs
directly.
A complete disaster for me, at least, since I - along with a substantial
number of reasonably active and involved IETF participants - am no qualified
to sit on NOMCOM.
With the current state of affairs, I can still ensure my voice is heard by
NOMCOM, whereas with direct voting, I could not. Given the current climate,
and particularly how it affects corporate-sponsored travel, I strongly
suspect that there'll be many more in my boat - indeed, it's substantially
worse for those of us not in continental north america anyway.
Of course, you could change the criteria, but the real critieria which - I
assume - the NOMCOM consider how much to weigh an opinion is presumably on
some ethereal "participation level", which is exceedingly difficult to
measure.
FWIW, the XMPP Standards Foundation has an actual membership, who do actual
voting. I'm deeply unconvinced it provides the best solution there, and I've
been successfully voted in to the XMPP Council twice. (Which may, of course,
be evidence of it not working at all, to some).
Dave.
--
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave(_at_)cridland(_dot_)net -
xmpp:dwd(_at_)dave(_dot_)cridland(_dot_)net
- acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
- http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade
--
--
New Website: http://hallambaker.com/
View Quantum of Stupid podcasts, Tuesday and Thursday each week,
http://quantumofstupid.com/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf