Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal

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

To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal
From: Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 09:29:38 -0500
Cc: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, dcrocker@xxxxxxxx, IETF Discussion <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <651803AE-97A4-4297-A079-B94A6BD1F104@nominum.com>
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)

>> So I suggest that providing explicit feedback to all appointees not up
>> for renewal become a regular part of nomcom's deliverables.
> I think this would be a fine plan.

great idea.  nomcom needs stuff to fill its copious spare time.

randy

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [eX-bulk] : Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal
  - From: Christopher LILJENSTOLPE
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal
  - From: Michael Richardson

References:
- Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal
  - From: Dave Crocker
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal
  - From: Ted Lemon

Prev by Date: RE: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal
Next by Date: Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal
Previous by thread: Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal
Next by thread: Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

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