On Mon, 10 May 2010, Dave CROCKER wrote:
Yes, it does stink. As nearly as I can tell, the import of having Day Passes,
in terms of other IETF participation such as being on Nomcom, was entirely
missed by the community -- that is, by all of us. We are now paying the price
for that.
But as engineers, this should come as no surprise to us. How many
times have you experienced "major consequences" as the result of
a "minor fix" in "some other part" of the system? I've certainly seen
it too many times to count, and the combination of engineering and
governance doesn't make it any less likely to happen.
Personally, I think the right answer might be some kind of "attendance
coefficient" based not just on "last N meetings attended" but on
overall attendance record (and by implication knowledge of the IETF).
So, in your case, having attended I am guessing 50 - 60 meetings or
more, your coefficient would be very high even if you decided to go
cheap on us and use the day pass for 5 meetings in a row.
It shouldn't be too hard to come up with a simple formula for the
coefficient and setting the threshold, but I have no doubt that we
could over-engineer that process too :-)
Ole
Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher, The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972 Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: ole(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf