On Feb 11, 2015, at 9:26 AM, Loa Andersson <loa(_at_)pi(_dot_)nu> wrote:
I guess I'm old-time minded here, what is wrong with 3 meetings out
of 5, and if you want co-authored document.
The main issue with three out of five is that it discriminates against people
who can't attend that often but are actively involved in the IETF. E.g., you
have kids, or you have a family member with an illness who needs care, so you
stay home for a year, and suddenly you're disenfranchised, even though you were
actively involved in the IETF that whole time.
As for Loa's question about why someone who hasn't done real IETF work
would want to volunteer, the answer is politics and/or ego. They or
their company might want to hold sway over nomcom or the person might
just want to add this to their resume.
With due respect - I don't think this is how it work, do we have any
running code? Our rules so far has not stopped anyone form paying and
register, sit at the back of a a couple of wg meetings and three IETF
meetings later drop his/her name into the hat. But has it happened?
The operation of each nomcom are pretty opaque to those who are not on it.
For those who have interacted with a nomcom as candidates, such an impression
might exist. It's possible that nomcom liaisons or chairs could speak to
this. However, since nomcom proceedings are supposed to be confidential, I
don't know how much they could really say. Because these properties of the
nomcom are intentional and useful, it does make sense to be particularly
careful about how nomcom eligibility is determined and not just trust to
peoples' good natures.