Re: Substantial nomcom procedure updates (Was: Re: Consolidating BCP 10 (Operation of the NomCom))

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

 



On 16/09/2014 09:46, Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 9/15/2014 2:45 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> The worst case, which is not a fantasy, is that 5 large companies encourage
>> their staff to volunteer, so we end up with 5 pairs of large-company
>> staff and nobody from the rest of the community. But (as Mike seems to
>> imply) if we put in rules to make this impossible, we'd be even further
>> from "each eligible volunteer is equally likely to be selected."
>> So this does need clarity of intent, one way or the other.
> 
> 
> Make it max 1 per company.

So how would you modify the assertion in quotes, which is
already untrue with the 2 per company rule?

> Real and substantial diversity is essential.

Agreed. That wasn't my point, though.

   Brian
> 
> If we cannot get an adequate nomcom on that basis, we've got bigger
> problems and nomcom selection isn't the place to try to solve it.
> 
> d/
> 





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