At 09:42 AM 6/27/2013, Eliot Lear wrote:
On 6/27/13 3:34 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote:
Why not just say directly that 'to prevent "capture", no more than X% of
the NomCom may work for a single organization' (where X is 15% or so, so
that even if a couple collude, they still can't get control).
It's already in RFC 3777. No more than 2 per company.
But that's still problematic. The current rules basically give any company who
provides >= 30% of the Nomcom volunteer pool an ~85.1% chance of having 2
members (sum of all percentages from 2-10 members), a 12.1% chance of having 1
and a 2.8% chance of having 0.
I believe the proposal as stated would further exacerbate that problem - not
for a given company, but for pretty much locking small companies and
individuals out of the Nomcom. Once scenario for this - both benign intentions
and non-benign - is that a company instead of sending one person to all the
meetings starts rotating the opportunity to attend the IETF among a number of
people - say 5. So instead of the potential of say 30 volunteers from one
company, we now suddenly have 150. And me with my single person consultancy -
still only has 1 slot to volunteer.
While it would be good to have more people involved, it would be bad in the
ways in which larger companies could game the system.
So - I'm not a big fan of the proposal without a lot more analysis of the
unintended consequences - and there WILL be unintended consequences.
Mike