Hi Allison,
in your model you don't count those people who have been rejecting to a
nomination,
just because they believe the current AD did a very good job and he/she should
be reelected.
So the situation is not that bad, if there is only the current AD on the
nominee list.
Cheers,
Mehmet
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-announce-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-announce-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On
Behalf Of ext NomCom Chair 2013
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 4:25 PM
To: IETF Announcement List
Cc: IETF Discuss
Subject: NOMCOM - Critical shortage of nominees for multiple areas
[Catchier Subject line - apologies to those offended by a duplicate]
A critically low number of people have accepted nominations for some of the
IESG open positions. There is only one nominee per slot in APP, OPS and TSV,
only two in INT and RAI. Many folks have declined nominations.
While the Nomcom appreciates that support for two years of intense service
is hard to assure, and while we are aware that there is much support for the
incumbents who are standing, the IETF should continually be considering
which new talent is available for our leadership, and the Nomcom process
needs for there to be some review and deliberation.
Therefore, we urgently request that more nominees come forward.
DEADLINES
Nominations - October 18
Questionnaires from nominees - October 25
Not coincidentally, this is a good time to think over and send your comments
about the current statements of desired expertise of positions - this is part
of
the Nomcom's annual review process as well. Send them to
nomcom13(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org.
Definitive location [*] of the current statements on desired expertise:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2013/expertise/
Instructions and details on nomination [**]:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ann/nomcom/60602/
Thanks, everyone,
Allison for the Nomcom
[*] This year the Nomcom tools were recoded, and also transitioned into the
datatracker. Apologies for a number of places where we didn't catch reference
errors.
[**] Yes, alas, the previous call for nominations used "OAM" instead of
"OPS," but
we have* corrected this (chair's pilot) error where it occurred in the Nomcom
pages.