On 14-Jul-20 21:57, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'd also like to challenge the assumption that the result is necessarily bad. > > If the IETF was a more typical SDO, we'd be funded by membership subscriptions and we might > well have voting weighted by membership categories. So big companies would have > proportionate power. For good reasons, we don't do that. Nevertheless, the fact is that big > companies can (and do) send more people, and provide more sponsorship (such as hosting > meetings, and funding Area Directors), than small companies. If they didn't get something > back for that, they would complain, or simply withdraw their resources. The chance to have > two people in the NomCom is quite a small "something" IMHO. I think that this is a very valid point. I do wonder though whether there may be an opportunity to inject a little more diversity into the process by requiring the second NomCom member from any organisation to be based in a different continent than the first? This shouldn't be too onerous for big companies as their operations will typically have multinational if not global scope. It would be even better to have limits on the total number of NomCom members from a given country and/or continent but at least seeking some diversity from within companies would be a good start. Andrew
