At 09:44 27-06-2013, Eggert, Lars wrote:
sorry, but it's silly to attempt to propose that remote attendees be
permitted to volunteer for NomCom without defining what defines a
remote attendee.
Agreed.
The issue you are raising - that limiting the NomCom pool to recent
attendees of physical IETF meetings may have downsides - is valid.
But at least the requirements the current policy sets are clearly defined.
Until you nail down what exactly defines a remote attendee, I can't
really form an opinion on whether allowing them into the NomCom pool
is a good idea or not.
What I did in the initial draft is to work from the text already in
RFC 3777. It has been mentioned by several people that participation
is a way for somebody to get IETF experience. The question is how
that participation can be defined.
At 10:00 27-06-2013, Paul Hoffman wrote:
Then maybe we should wait for you to do so. This discussion is kind
of pointless if we don't have shared definitions.
I think that the NomCom eligibility criteria should not discriminate
between any contributor to the IETF Standard Process. The view I got
from a previous discussion of the draft is that "people from emerging
regions are disenfranchised; that's how IETF culture works".
Regards,
S. Moonesamy