ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last Call: Policy Statement on the Day Pass Experiment

2010-05-10 11:05:37
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Kurt Zeilenga 
<Kurt(_dot_)Zeilenga(_at_)isode(_dot_)com> wrote:

...

Well, being such a person, before I registered for a day pass I did not 
consider the NOMCOM ramifications.  If I had, I think it would likely that I 
would simply have assumed the existing BCP were in force.

I agree here.

I argue that what the IETF now proposes is not a clarification to the BCP but 
a change to the BCP.   Applying such changes retroactively stinks.

I disagree here for the reasons I've already posted.

So, with such disagreements, someone has to settle it even if there
isn't a clear consensus. Pretty much all the bodies who could possibly
make this decision have an extremely remote but theoretically real
conflict. I have confidence that if there is a clear consensus that
day membership should count as attendance towards NOMCOM
qualification, the IESG will see that. But I sure don't see such a
consensus against the IESG suggestion so I think it is not only
correct but that it should stick.

Donald

So, I guess I won't have NOMCOM eligible this year (due to the change, 
assuming I attend the next IETF under a full registration).

-- Kurt
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>