> I was going back through a longer range of past NomCom, and this is the > earliest deadline i could find. Dean explained to me at the end of the week > that he would like to reduce the work of NomCom this way and thinks this could > help get more volunteers for NomCom. Last year NomCom extended feedback until the end of IETF week [1] after first declaring they would like it to end before the IETF week [2]. I think this recent trend of trying of doing deliberations face-to-face at the end of the November IETF week is excellent, particularly when compared to doing things over multiple video calls when nobody is in the same timezone. It makes the NomCom more efficient, and (from what I saw as the observer last year), better able to consider nominees and positions holistically. > IMHO most participants who will provide feedback are also active contributors and > hence often busy in the last weeks before IETF, writing drafts, preparing meetings > or meeting materials. (NomComs are also subject to "astro-turfing" from IETF newcomers who have little experience other than their colleague who works for the same company. Toward that end, there is a GitHub issue to make it more clear [3].) > I propose that the deadline for NomCom feedback should be friday OEB after > IETF week. This gives one more week to give feedback and then one more week > for NomCom to do the final calls with the "votes" before e.g.: USA thanksgiving. It also dooms the NomCom to have video meetings rather than in-person. > Alternatively, run the current deadlines as an experiment for 2 more years and > see if it actually did significantly increase the amount of NomCom volunteers. I would be surprised if you can isolate this one factor as a reason. For example, when I was Chair we had the most volunteers ever [4] and while I have suspicions, we never figured out why. I believe if you tell them there will be multiple video calls during end of year, rather than a day of in-person meetings at the IETF, you will get *fewer* volunteers. [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/ann/863352/ [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/ann/833465/ [3] https://github.com/ietf-tools/datatracker/issues/8145 [4] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-second-report-on-the-rfc-8989-experiment-20230315/
