Re: List of volunteers for the 2021-2022 NomCom

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



While I agree we probably have the time to reopen it, we can't just decide to do so. We can't simply change the procedures because we want to (particularly note when "we" is some vocal subset of the community.)

As far as I can tell from the rules we have adopted, we have to leave the rules as written and run the selection. Meanwhile, we would have to race to write an I-D, get community rough consensus on it, and get it approved by the IESG, all before the random number selection that is mandated (since otherwise we would be changing the random result AFTER knowing it.) Given our history for process changes of any kind, I just don't see it. (I am not even sure the various mandatory time lines would permit it.)

Look folks, I am not happy with the lack of diversity. But the solution to that was to get folks to volunteer. I didn't push as hard as I should have. Probably because I do not htink chair pushing helps much. But I did forward the announcement to remind folks. To all three of my working groups. I doubt it mattered.

Yours,
Joel


On 6/27/2021 2:27 PM, Andrew Campling wrote:
+1

Re-opening the volunteering window for a week or two would seem like a reasonable step to take – if the numbers don’t change then that’s on us and not the organisations of the current pool of volunteers.

Andrew

*From:*Allison Mankin <allison.mankin@xxxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* 27 June 2021 16:25
*To:* Michael Richardson <mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Cc:* Michael StJohns <mstjohns@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@xxxxxxxxx>; ietf@xxxxxxxx
*Subject:* Re: List of volunteers for the 2021-2022 NomCom

+1 to Michael's point. We've had the most diverse nomcoms when the pool has been over 200. I'd like to see the volunteering reopened

On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 11:18 Michael Richardson <mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

    Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@xxxxxxxxx
    <mailto:stewart.bryant@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
         > This has provided a statistical basis for my conclusion on
    initially
         > seeing this list. I imagine I am not alone.

         > This Nomcom volunteer pool is insufficiently diverse.

    I mostly agree.

    I don't have numbers for years before last, but my recollection is
    that it's
    usually closer to 200, often a bit over.

         > I think the chair needs to extend the time to volunteer and
    encourage a
         > more diverse pool.

         > Normally the timeline is set by a need to physically meet at
    the summer
         > IETF, but that does not apply this year so there is more time
    to make
         > the selection.

    I don't know if that's the right thing to do, and I'm not convinced that
    we'll get more volunteers this way.  But, I don't really object to
    trying.

    --
    ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh
    networks [
    ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT
    architect   [
    ] mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
    http://www.sandelman.ca/ <http://www.sandelman.ca/>        |   ruby
    on rails    [





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux