Salz, Rich <rsalz=40akamai.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Many of your ideas are good ones worth examining closer.
>> One of the main drivers of our "diversity" problem is the input set of
> people from which we draw our candidates - it lacks diversity on a
> number of axes. We've noted this before - that GIGO or rather
> Conformity In is Conformity Out.
> I strongly disagree with this. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of
> the better.
> I looked at the 2020 and 2019 candidates, neither were homogeneous. (I
> could not look earlier as the website just says "closed" and I couldn't
> think of an easy mail archive search query to find the list of names.)
> There was diversity, even if it didn't really show up in the
> selections.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/
lets you see the announcements from previous years... annoyingly, since the
NOMCOM chair usually points at the feedback page, getting the list is
actually difficult.
Given that it's now been routinely open list, I suggest that
a) the list be open
b) the announcements should, at this point, list the nominees.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
