On 4/22/2019 3:39 PM, Keith Moore wrote: > Regardless of how many (or few) signatures are required, I really > don't think it makes sense any more to use meeting attendance > (physical or virtual) as a criterion for who can sign a petition > [*]. I think it should be some measure of how much a person actually > has invested in helping IETF do work, say by writing or reviewing > documents, chairing a WG, serving on a directorate, IESG, IAB, etc. > Those are the people who are in the best position to evaluate a recall > petition. IETF should pay more attention to doers than goers. > > Maybe we should only require 3 such people, but let them be people who > do work. Keith, you are almost making an argument for seniority, as in "pick people who are senior enough to have chaired a WG, be nominated to join a directorate, served in the IESG or IAB." I have no doubt that you will find people there who are committed to the IETF, but we might have a problem if only the IETF elite participates in the nomcom or is allowed to sign petitions against other members of the elite. -- Christian Huitema
