On Aug 21, 2012, at 3:10 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
This document also excludes certain individuals who are directly
paid for their work with the IETF...
I think you can leave it at that.
While on this topic, we might as well get it right. The text in the draft is:
This document also excludes certain individuals who are directly paid
for their work with the IETF, and who, therefore, have a direct
personal financial incentive in the selection of the leadership
boards. We limit this exclusion to a few people who are paid for
long-term full-time work. In practice, they are unlikely to
volunteer for the NomCom anyway, so this addition makes little
practical change.
I assume the intent is exclude people who are paid by the IETF to do work in
the IETF. For example, the IAD. The problem is that no one is paid by the
IETF. The IETF has several people who do work at it's direction. This is done
as direct employees of ISOC or as contractors who have their contracts with
ISOC. We also hire (via ISOC) companies that provide services to the IETF.
This ranges from the secretariat services, NOC services, tools development,
program management services, and tools specification development. In these
cases it difficult to tell if an individual is working for the IETF "long-term
full-time work".
Further, the text as written could be interpreted to exclude people who's
employers pay they to participate in the IETF. For example, that would include
me because it is part of my job to participate in the IETF. I don't think that
is the intent of the text in the draft, but it would be easy to interpret it
that way. OK, maybe I don't do it full time, but all of the IESG position
require full time support.
If this text is to remain, it needs to be clearer as to what it means.
Bob
Bob