On 16 Aug 2022, at 22:41, Michael Richardson wrote:
Michael StJohns <mstjohns@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 8/16/2022 5:35 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:>> Eric Rescorla <ekr@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> qualified volunteer. They have >> no control over who they could >> transfer to, their only choice is to>> transfer or not. >> >> > Correct, but they get to look at the next person on the list. >> >> Given the two from one org limit, what's the attack here?> DId you already forget what happened last time around? E.g. I'm the > second member from a company, and the 11th person is the third member. > I decline to serve, the other guy picks it up and the company doesn't> lose a slot. I'm still actually lost. The company still has only two people, right? It's just not the same two people. How is it a win? Why would 11th person be more or less honest than you?
If the any of the two people picked from the company is an inexperienced and non-influential member of the community and #11 on the list is a very experienced and influential member, the three can decide who has the best skills to influence the NomCom to pick the candidates of their choice. The company loads the volunteer pool in order to maximize the odds that *someone* in the company gets chosen, and if lucky (with enough people in the list the odds are high), that #11 on the list is a person from the same company and then they get to choose which of the three will serve on the NomCom.
The key is that nobody should be able to influence the makeup of the NomCom other than removing themself.
pr -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best
