I originally said two...and would prefer that. What I am saying is that there should be a total of two or three instances as a NOMCOM candidate and that is a much different statement than figuring who is in office now and who is eligible...As to what it prevents-career Internet Standards jockey's. And since the purpose is to keep the IETF honest, I want the same term limits for any and all IETF positions, including the TRUST as well. By the way - has anyone seen a Business Plan for the TRUST and what it is supposed to do? I don't mean some fictional set of ideas - I mean the business plan. I want to see exactly what the Trust is responsible for and how its to be measured, Todd ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Fenner" <fenner@xxxxxxxxx> To: "todd glassey" <tglassey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: "IETF-Discussion" <> Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 7:04 PM Subject: Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lack of communicaiton here... > On 9/4/06, todd glassey <tglassey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Its time to talk about term limits for NOMCOM appointments. Two or maybe > > three terms at most are enough. > > Todd, > > Given that there are no standing IESG appointees that have served > for three terms, what exactly would making such a rule change? > > Arkko, Jari 0.2 > Callon, Ross 0.2 > Carpenter, Brian 0.7 > Dusseault, Lisa 0.2 > Eggert, Lars 0.2 > Fenner, Bill 2.5 > Hardie, Ted 1.7 > Hartman, Sam 0.8 > Housley, Russ 1.7 > Jennings, Cullen 0.2 > Kessens, David 1.3 > Peterson, Jon 1.7 > Romascanu, Dan 0.2 > Townsley, Mark 0.7 > Westerlund, Magnus 0.2 > > (This is "AD" and "number of terms served", where "numbers of terms > served" is counted by adding up the number of IETFs the AD is listed > under at http://www.ietf.org/iesg_mem.html and dividing by 6) > > Bill > > [to be fair, 2 of the above positions didn't exist until their holders > were appointed 0.2 terms ago] _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf