Lixia,
On 7/18/2010 1:14 PM, Lixia Zhang wrote:
The comment: I support the idea of having a second 'expertise' pool of
volunteers, but I wonder where comes this suggestion of selecting *3* members
from this pool. A few random questions:
- Do we know what is this number for the last several NOMCOMs?
The last two Nomcom Chairs were part of the design team for the proposal. As I
recall, Joel actually ran some of these kinds of numbers. I don't remember the
details he produced, but they were part of our consideration and we definitely
all haggled quite a bit about the number to recommend.
There was a remarkable amount of support for 3, bordering on unanimity.
(Exercise to the reader: take a guess who was the odd one out...)
The reason for preferring 3 was balancing a desire to ensure a /minimum/ level
of knowledge but also to limit the amouont of /dominance/ of old-timers.
So the feeling was that two was not enough to meet the minimum, but requiring
four would start feeling like dominance among the voting members. (Note that
the current proposal still allows four or more, but only through the statistical
selection process, not as a mandate.)
Take into account the fact that many people probably do not attend all IETF
meetings, as a strawman for a longer IETF experience, what about attending 5
of the last 8 or 10 meetings?
Speaking only for myself, I'll say that it's quite easy to go to many IETF
meetings, but never learn anything about IETF process. When someone has the
responsibility for choosing the people who manage the process, we ought to focus
on ensuring that level of knowledge. Hence the second pool.
I've been on 3 Nomcoms. Some of the folk who did not know much IETF process
were nonetheless very strong contributors. Some weren't. The key argument for
retaining this "less experienced" criterion is that it tends to add some fresh
perspective (along with the naivete... so it's a mixed benefit.)
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf