On Fri, 7 May 2010, John C Klensin wrote: > Finally, as Dave Crocker pointed out, complexity in our > operating rules rarely serves us well. Whether the discussion > is about this case or about Nomcom qualifications more > generally, we should not try to do enough hair-splitting to > cover every possible case... if only because we will get it > wrong and then require even more hair-splitting. That is exactly my point .. differentiating daypass vs full fare registration is hair splitting over a critera that all seem to think is weak to begin with. I still think the right clarification is that for the duration of the daypass experiment, attending on a day pass is considered equivalent to attending with a full registration. The broader discussion in the future should figure out what characteristics of attendence are meaningful critera to be considered for nomcom participation. Simple full weak registration is meaningless as I've already illustrated from my own behavior. Dave Morris To be clear .. I reject the proposed IESG statement. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf