Dave: >> I agree that this sentence needs changed. However, I think that one other sentence should be updated while we are dealing with the IAOC in this document. >> >> RFC 3777 says: >> >> Member Recall: This is the process by which the behavior of a sitting >> member of the IESG or IAB may be questioned, perhaps resulting in >> the removal of the sitting member. >> >> The community should also be able to recall an IAOC member. > > > That alters the scope of the draft abit. Hence the title of the draft would now need to be something like: > > Update to RFC 3777 to Clarify Aspects of Eligibility and Recall > > As for the earlier discussion seeking to exclude paid staff, I think it odd to have criteria that would permit /any/ paid staff to sit on Nomcom. We pay for a number of folk 'staff' folk to show up and IETF meetings and none of them should qualify for Nomcom, IMO. Two things ... (1) Yes, if my suggestion is accepted, updating two sentences (instead of just one) to include the IAOC does change the scope of the document, and the title should reflect the proper scope. (2) Looking at the history (https://www.ietf.org/nomcom/committee.html), it does not seem that there has been an issue of 'staff' seeking NomCom spots. Prior to IETF Last Call, a previous version of this document was discussed on this mail list and on the ietf-nomcom mailing list. It was also discussed by a design team made up of ex-NomCom Chairs, My sense of those discussions is to exclude as few people as necessary to avoid a self-selecting leadership, and the current document reflects that perspective. Russ