I do recall a case where both chairs of a WG belonged to a Major Organization. World domination was thwarted, however, because the chairs couldn't actually agree on anything; the organization was big enough that competing views were widespread within it. Much to the frustration of other members of the Major Organization. And the members of the working group. This suggests that we can't produce viable committees _anyway_. Lloyd Wood http://sat-net.com/L.Wood/ ________________________________________ From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dave Crocker [dhc@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: 09 July 2013 21:53 To: ietf@xxxxxxxx Cc: nomcom-chair-2013@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Final Announcement of Qualified Volunteers > Should we consider changing it to "not more than one" in view > of today's data? On it's face, that sounds like an absolutely Draconian rule. However stepping back a bit, it should prompt a simple question: Is the IETF so reliant on a tiny number of companies that we cannot produce viable committees if we require each member of a committee to be affiliated with a different company? In other words, are we really incapable of requiring extensive corporate diversity? d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net