IMO, of course, but ...
On 3/24/2019 9:01 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
On Mar 24, 2019, at 1:58 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I have never held any official IETF
position and I have been able to participate in WG
activities just fine.
Yes, but you have no say in IETF leadership.
People keep repeating this statement, but it isn't true. In the
30 some odd years that we've been using a nomcom, I've been a
voting member twice. I however have contributed commentary on
candidates, lobbied quietly and not so quietly for and against
both candidates and incumbents, and generally made a nuisance of
myself in another 10 or so Nomcoms. I would suggest to you that I
think I've had a lot more impact on the selections when I wasn't
on the Nomcom than when I was.
What I've heard from Mike, and from other early Nomcom chairs that I've interviewed, is that most of the people on Nomcoms have been pretty dependent on input from people who aren't on Nomcom for many/most of the positions they are responsible for filling, for at least a couple of decades. If you work in TSV, you might have opinions on many of the people who might make good TSV ADs, but you might not have opinions on most of the people who might make good SEC ADs, or IAB folk who are responsible for liaison oversight, or LLC members ...
So, they really do have to listen to the community, and most Nomcom members I've talked to in the past decade wish they had gotten more input from the community, rather than less, and you sure don't have to be at meetings to provide that feedback.
The key thing here is that BOTH require you have some physical
presence at the meetings - you really can't make the contacts,
form the opinions, express the opinions, twist arms, etc unless
you can sit down and have a meal, a beer, an argument, a joke -
all things that are still difficult to do via just an on-line
interaction.
My experience has been that online interaction has been more effective for me (relatively) than it has been for Mike, when it comes to feedback, but it's certainly true that the hands-on dragooning (onto and off of Nomcom-reviewed bodies) is easier than trying to do that online.
That said, EVERYONE who participates in the IETF, whether at the
meeting, remotely, or only by WG mailing list, helps to form and
change the culture of the IETF, and in turn helps to shape the
holes into which we plug the leadership. It may not be anything
as direct as a vote, but make no mistake: anyone who wants to can
have a say in what the IETF leadership is or will be. So keep
nominating people, commenting on candidates, and talking about
what you think the IETF should be.
The last sentence in this paragraph ^^^^ is the most important - the IAB and IESG don't shape or change the culture nearly as much as people think they do, or should. It's really up to the community, and as of Thursday morning this week, that will include me.
I'm very pleased to see SM driving the conversation about requirements for recall petition signatories on this mailing list, and submitting a draft. I hope people look at his draft, and help improve it where necessary, and when that's all over, I hope SM drops a note to the IESG saying "this draft is ready for publication, who is going to shepherd it?"
That should work. And if it doesn't work, the community should be figuring out why it doesn't work, and what needs to change to make it work.
Make good choices, of course. And do the right thing.
Spencer
