On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 12:57 PM Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Rob Wilton \(rwilton\) <rwilton=40cisco.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> * Making this a 2-year term is likely to make it harder to find
> volunteers. It many cases, it is necessary to persuade both the
NOMCOM chair is already two years, with the second year being past-chair.
I've argued for sliping it six months earlier, so next year's chair joins the
previous nomcom around October as (non-voting) "chair-elect" to learn about
process stuff.
My experience is that the past-chair role is largely moot by October.
So, we'd never want/need anyone to serve two terms in a row.
Also, I and many other chairs have gone from serving as a nomcom member (me,
two years in a row) to being chair. So I spent *4* years influencing who
would be on the I*. Very interesting is that I got to see how choices I made
came back two years later to be renewed. Gosh, I felt like a really proud
teacher or parent or something...
I would also like to see a tradition of alternating genders for nomcom-chair,
but I recognize that the ISOC president has a hard enough time as it is.
I don't think that we need to write any rules about how long, as I think that
the ISOC president can apply good judgement.
(I've been on nomcom three times as a voting member)
I have been attending IETF for 10+ years, fully registered and almost always completely attending but I have been in nomcom 0, yes zero times as a voting member, I think that the algorithm is useless at least for me. Maybe we need a mechanism to try to eliminate repeat selections somehow, my friend Don, this is for you.
Behcet
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
