On 06/27/2013 02:24 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: > > Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > However, before getting into that I'd like to hear from > > folks who've been on or chaired nomcoms. I know a lot of > > it is done remotely, but how important is the f2f part > > that happens during meetings? Would it really be ok if > > say 5 voting members could never come to a meeting > > whilst serving? (And I think that'd not be an unlikely > > outcome.) > > Please note two things: > 1) under the original proposal and my revised one, you have > attend in person somewhat regularly. > > 2) for the November meeting, the nomcom *itself* must be present. Tend to agree. > I think it unrealistic to think that the nomcom itself could > be remote for that meeting. For the summer and march meeting, > the nomcom could be anywhere. Not this year:-) > > so, even if you are eligible, don't volunteer for the nomcom if you can't > attend the november meeting. But doesn't that run counter to one aspect of SM's otherwise reasonable goal? (And if getting randomly picked for nomcom implied some I* thing has to pay your way to the Nov meeting, then this is IMO a *much* larger change proposal.) S. > > -- > Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandelman Software Works > >