On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Peter Saint-Andre
<stpeter(_at_)stpeter(_dot_)im>wrote:
On 10/26/11 1:47 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
On Oct 26, 2011, at 8:38 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
(e.g., the NomCom
schedule is defined in terms of three meetings a year).
no problem. We stop having the nomcom.
Sure, we just set up a (two-tier?) membership structure and have all the
members vote. Easy.
[MB] You don't need a membership structure to have voting - you just allow
anyone that has attended the requisite number of meetings per the Nomcom
process to vote - i.e., if you are qualified to be a voting member of the
Nomcom, you can vote. I personally believe that voting would be better
than the current model. As it is, a very small percentage of the
participants actually contribute to the process in the form of nominating or
providing feedback:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-barnes-nomcom-report-2009-00 (section 6.2)
So, making it easier to provide input in the form of a vote might actually
get more folks caring about who the leaders are. It would also save a
tremendous amount of work on the part of the folks that serve on the Nomcom.
[/MB]
[Also, ducking]
Mary.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf