On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 01:02:16PM +0300, Yoav Nir wrote:
> Knowing Tal, I???d guess he is amused by all the lawyering going on here.
> But we usually treat NomCom membership as a burden to be shouldered, not as a prize to be won. So fairness to the candidate doesn???t come into play.
Unless you are unhappy with IETF leadership and silly enough to think the
pool of candidates has better options.
> > Of course i haven't really thought about what i would think about the
> > improbable stochastically impossible evil conspiracy theory that was
> > invented in this thread, but if IETF starts to make rules
> > assuming large companies are such EvilCorps and ignore probabilities,
> > should IETF then still accept money from the same big corporations ?
>
> The rules are against accidental stacking of the NomCom.
I think like Melinda, you are missing my point. The text you cite from
me in the paragraph above was NOT referring to limiting candidates of
a company to two, it was solely commenting on the desire to refine
the rules such as to eliminate the "switcharoo EvilCo attack" (if that's
an appropriate shorthand).
Cheers
Toerless
> There are plenty of ways for EvilCorp to game the system by having its IETF people work as independent consultants paid by EvilCorp???s customers rather than directly by EvilCorp.
