Re: Nomcom

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi John,
  Just responding to one specific concern (No. 3) you raised. I do
believe that the other 3 (Nos. 1, 2 and 4) require process changes that
cannot take place during the current nomcom cycle.

On 11-10-27 11:25 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
> ...snipped...
> (3) I don't believe it has happened this year, but trends in the
> community predict that, sooner or later, we will have someone
> volunteer for a large number of positions simply because he or
> she (or whomever they work for) wants them in the IETF
> leadership.   Someone ought to be able to write one comment that
> says "Goofy wants to be in the leadership to enhance his resume
> and told several of us that at a Bar BOF and should not be
> selected for _any_ position.  If you don't believe me alone,
> check with X, Y, or Z."  In the current model, that would
> require writing a separate review for each position.  Lots of
> make-work; might not happen at all.   But a Nomcom would really
> want that input I think.

You can already do this today. Just enter your feedback about the
nominee into *any* one of the positions and state that it is for all the
positions. The tool does not handle this case, but the humans behind
certainly do.

Thanks
Suresh
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]