Yes, this again.
I've refreshed RFC7437bis in the datatracker since we're effectively between active NomCom periods, so now's a good time to take another look at this.
For those that didn't follow along last time, the big showstopper for this draft as I have it now had to do with updating the criteria for qualifying to serve on the NomCom. The current draft says:
(1) To qualify, one must have attended three of the last five in-person meetings, as it's been for a long time now.
(2) This is regularly criticized as selecting for attendees with the support and budget to travel to the meetings, and possibly excludes people who make substantial or numerous IETF contributions but participate remotely more than in person.
We made previous attempts on this list to come up with new criteria given (2) above, but weren't successful at coming to consensus, so I took them back out, leaving the text that's there now. The previous thread:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/QHwG1KrQDBK9u0wsfALjPSre-pwI'd like to take another run at this before the next NomCom really gets going. One suggestion I was given here at IETF 95 is to come up with some system that's worth trying, and not over-engineer it to protect against gaming or other abuses until such time as such abuse is evident. It might, for example, be sufficient defense to empower the NomCom Chair or the IETF Chair (or both) with a "panic button", making them able to declare that selection criteria will fall back to what we have now if it looks like the proposed new qualification system is likely to yield an inappropriate set of selecting NomCom members.
Comments welcome.