-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
There was a long discussion of Day Passes in 2010, and it lead to this IESG
statement:
http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/nomcom-eligibility-and-day-passes.html
In my view, this was the right decision. We need people that have been exposed
to the IETF culture.
Russ
On Jan 9, 2015, at 2:03 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
I would like to change the nomcom eligibility criteria.
SM has proposed some things awhile ago in:
draft-moonesamy-nomcom-eligibility-01
kept the current rules of 3/5, but added options where
the "3rd" meeting could really be in the form either having
been to a lot of meetings, or having used day-passes..
I don't think SM's proposal does the right thing.
My concern is primarily about people who enter our culture,
and then for some reason are unable to travel. (Could be health,
could be inability to get VISAs, could be funding, could be children)
So I would keep the 3/5 in-person meetings to *become* nomcom
eligible.
Once eligible, the rules for remaining eligible would be different.
I would propose something like having *contributed* to at least two
meetings in the past four. We could come up with complex or simple
rules on what it means to contribute, we could automated it, and
we can discuss all the ways that various rules could be gamed.
My ideas for contribution would include:
0) attend the meeting in person.
1) be a document shepherd or working group chair on a document
that entered AUTH48.
2) be the document uploader (pressed submit) on a document that
was scheduled into a WG session. (A document authors that has
never been to a meeting would never have become eligible. If
document authors want to rotate who submits, that actually
seems like a good idea if it keeps their hand in, as I've had to almost
stalk some co-authors during AUTH48 who seem to have fallen off the
planet)
3) opened a ticket on a document that was scheduled into a WG session.
4) scribed for the I* telechats.
Note that I have avoided counting "remote attendance" activities
specifically, because that would require us to figure out who attended
and register them, etc. and I don't think we are ready for that yet.
--
] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks
[
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect
[
] mcr(_at_)sandelman(_dot_)ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby
on rails [
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
iEYEARECAAYFAlSwXXgACgkQiuTu0PWcEcujzwCeMR8jQ2DaD2sDzZh7wxKca9c/
A+EAnA66O9Ov2cGxuO/8xn1eu9v3u7GS
=wdx9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----