> So for the experiment I think this can be skipped, however I think long term if > these rules would be the basis for new permanent rules one should understand how > much these missref cluster impacts the set of eligible persons. Given that the relevant data (when a draft was approved and when the RFC was published) will be available, the evaluation of the experiment could certainly cover this point. Regards Brian On 22-Dec-20 00:33, Magnus Westerlund wrote: > On Fri, 2020-12-18 at 15:20 -0500, Joel M. Halpern wrote: >> I do not believe this document in any way removes the various >> disqualification criteria. As such, is your question just about the >> statistics, or is there another issue that I am missing? > > So the second point on A) is a question about the statistics and current test > implementation that arrived at this data. I think the specification is clear > that it is WG chairs, and not chairs of other groups that are listed in the data > tracker. > > On my second main bullet, it is mostly a question if this really was the > intention considering that this will impact a number of people that are trapped > in clusters. It will likely lead to a small set of individuals being qualified > for a longer period since the time they where active in defining and getting > their document approved. From me that could have been a criteria that wouldn't > have been affected by C238 etc. However, I don't know how many others like me > that it will not matter for as I will qualify anyway even if it was 5-years > since IESG approval, this due to other documents, and will qualify on path 1 > also. Do you know how many people that are impacted by this? > > So for the experiment I think this can be skipped, however I think long term if > these rules would be the basis for new permanent rules one should understand how > much these missref cluster impacts the set of eligible persons. > > Cheers > > Magnus Westerlund > (3 months left as AD) > > >> >> Yours, >> Joel >> >> On 12/18/2020 8:44 AM, Magnus Westerlund wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> So I have review the document and have some comments and questions. >>> >>> A) Section 4, Path 2: >>> Path 2: Has been a Working Group Chair or Secretary within the 3 years prior >>> to the day the call for nomcom volunteers is sent to the community. >>> >>> Am I correct that the datatracker database will be the data source used to >>> asses this criteria? Should that be explicitly mentioned? >>> >>> Secondly, I think I will show up in this data set when it is run this summer >>> because I am currently listed as chair for TSVAREA, which is listed as group >>> but isn't a WG. Has this source of faults been considered? >>> >>> ) Section 4: >>> >>> Path 3: Has been a listed author or editor (on the front page) of at least 2 >>> IETF stream RFCs within the last 5 years prior to the day the call for >>> nomcom volunteers is sent to the community. An Internet-Draft that has been >>> approved by the IESG and is in the RFC Editor queue counts the same as a >>> published RFC (with the relevant date being the date the draft was added to >>> the RFC editor queue). So the 5 year timer extends back to the date 5 years >>> before the date when the call for nomcom volunteers is sent to the >>> community. >>> >>> As I unfortunately have managed to write a document for various reasons >>> spent more than 5 years in Missref (C238). So if I interpret this correct, >>> assuming C238 is published prior to the call for volunteers next year I will >>> get approved for this, despite that the document are more than 5 years since >>> they entered the RFC-editor queue. I don't think this needs to be addressed >>> as it is a corner case and will affect very few. However, having a document >>> stay in the RFC-editor queue for a long time makes this rule apply for very >>> long time. I don't know how big the effect of this would be, but we have a >>> large set of C238 authors that will if this rule is used for the future have >>> their nomcom eligibility extend for another 5 years, even if they haven't >>> been active and participating by the publication of C238. >>> >>> Otherwise it looks good. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Magnus Westerlund >>> >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce-bounces@xxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of The >>>> IESG >>>> Sent: den 2 december 2020 16:44 >>>> To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@xxxxxxxx> >>>> Cc: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand@xxxxxxxx >>>> Subject: Last Call: <draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-08.txt> >>> >>> (Additional >>>> Criteria for Nominating Committee Eligibility) to Experimental RFC >>>> >>>> >>>> The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider >>> >>> the >>>> following document: - 'Additional Criteria for Nominating Committee >>>> Eligibility' >>>> <draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-08.txt> as Experimental RFC >>>> >>>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits >>> >>> final >>>> comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the last- >>>> call@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2020-12-30. Exceptionally, comments may be >>>> sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the beginning >>> >>> of >>>> the Subject line to allow automated sorting. >>>> >>>> Abstract >>>> >>>> >>>> This document defines a process experiment under RFC 3933 that >>>> temporarily updates the criteria for qualifying volunteers to >>>> participate in the IETF Nominating Committee. It therefore also >>>> updates the criteria for qualifying signatories to a community recall >>>> petition. The purpose is to make the criteria more flexible in view >>>> of increasing remote participation in the IETF and a reduction in >>>> face-to-face meetings. The experiment is of fixed duration and will >>>> apply to one, or at most two, Nominating Committee cycles. This >>>> document temporarily varies the rules in RFC 8713. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The file can be obtained via >>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> IETF-Announce mailing list >>>> IETF-Announce@xxxxxxxx >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce >>>> -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
