Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom ELEGIBILITY

[Russ Housley <housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dave:

On 13 February 2015 at 04:40, Russ Housley <housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

We disagree.  Many people tell us (on the IAOC surveys) that the most important thing that happens at IETF meetings is the hallway conversations.  It is a significant part of the culture.

This makes me really quite angry.

I'm sorry that you are angry.

Maybe my last note wasn't clear; I wrote it as gently mocking sarcasm, but clearly this is too subtle, since you've written something so diametrically opposed to what I was hinting at that it may as well be a strawman. Maybe it is, and maybe you're simply trolling for a more obvious reaction from me, and similar folk. In which case, bravo, you have it. But if this is a genuine viewpoint, then it epitomises everything that's wrong with the IETF, and represents an appalling and untenable position for any IAB member, let alone the IAB Chair to take.

I was not replying to your note.  I was replying to Ted Lemon.  Based on his follow-up message, I think he understood my point.

Sure, I appreciate that human contact is important. I've been to two IETF meetings in the flesh, and I enjoy, and have had significant benefit from, hallway conversations.

But to claim it's "the most important thing", and to further imply that no other IETF participation or activity should count for anything is just astonishing.

I said no such thing.  I said that NomCom members need to understand the culture, and that participation in the meetings is an important aspect of learning that culture.  In my view, this is confirmed by the survey results.

I would love for remote participation tools to offer the same experience.  Today they do not.  Maybe some day, remote participation tools will become good enough, and when that happens we can deemphasize the meeting participation in the rules for NomCom eligibility.

Russ