Hi Allison, in your model you don't count those people who have been rejecting to a nomination, just because they believe the current AD did a very good job and he/she should be reelected. So the situation is not that bad, if there is only the current AD on the nominee list. Cheers, Mehmet > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-announce-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-announce-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On > Behalf Of ext NomCom Chair 2013 > Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 4:25 PM > To: IETF Announcement List > Cc: IETF Discuss > Subject: NOMCOM - Critical shortage of nominees for multiple areas > > [Catchier Subject line - apologies to those offended by a duplicate] > > A critically low number of people have accepted nominations for some of the > IESG open positions. There is only one nominee per slot in APP, OPS and TSV, > only two in INT and RAI. Many folks have declined nominations. > > While the Nomcom appreciates that support for two years of intense service > is hard to assure, and while we are aware that there is much support for the > incumbents who are standing, the IETF should continually be considering > which new talent is available for our leadership, and the Nomcom process > needs for there to be some review and deliberation. > > Therefore, we urgently request that more nominees come forward. > > DEADLINES > Nominations - October 18 > Questionnaires from nominees - October 25 > > Not coincidentally, this is a good time to think over and send your comments > about the current statements of desired expertise of positions - this is part of > the Nomcom's annual review process as well. Send them to nomcom13@xxxxxxxx. > > Definitive location [*] of the current statements on desired expertise: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2013/expertise/ > > Instructions and details on nomination [**]: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/ann/nomcom/60602/ > > Thanks, everyone, > > Allison for the Nomcom > > [*] This year the Nomcom tools were recoded, and also transitioned into the > datatracker. Apologies for a number of places where we didn't catch reference > errors. > > [**] Yes, alas, the previous call for nominations used "OAM" instead of "OPS," but > we have* corrected this (chair's pilot) error where it occurred in the Nomcom > pages.