Mary B <mary.h.barnes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> form. I think I was probably the first. And, it's not that I hadn't
> volunteered to be on the Nomcom for the 9+ Nomcoms. I figured with my luck
> being chair was the only way I'd get on a Nomcom (I don't buy lottery
> tickets). But, I thought being chair and not having been on a prior Nomcom
> was a positive because I brought in no bias into the part of the
> process
Like the various T-shirts having pseudo-concert tours, which are really lists
of invasations...
_Join the NomCom (as chair even) and help pick ADs, before the NomCom picks
you as an AD_
:-)
> I can tell you having just served on a Nomcom as a voting member that the
> member's insight into what all is involved in serving as chair doesn't come
> close to the amount of work and tasks involved. It is one of the most
> difficult roles in IETF in my opinion. But, the overall outcome of the
> process is more dependent on the voting members and the fact that only 10%
> of the community is generally willing to volunteer for the role is a bigger
> problem IMHO.
I agree with you.
Picking chairs would be easier if we had more participation.
> In short, I think chair selection, while probably a challenging task for
> the ISOC chair, is the least of our problems when it comes to the integrity
> of the process. It likely would be very helpful to document how past ISOC
> chairs have made their selection, but I don't think it's a good idea, nor
> necessary, to open it up to volunteers, community feedback, etc.
I mostly agree with you.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
