Stewart, I agree strongly. However, given your comment and those of Randy and others that we cannot assume a return to "normal" until IETF 110 (if then), I think we'd better be paying careful attention to the definition of "attended". And, while what we do about that long-term is almost certainly a matter for eligibility-discuss, we should think through whatever decisions are made about this specific Nomcom issue to be confident they don't over-constrain or significantly complicate future decisions. best, john --On Saturday, March 14, 2020 07:01 +0000 Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > That ignores one of the reasons for requiring attendance which > is to better know the IETF and hence to have the context for > decisions. > > I would prefer that the requirement to have actually attended > three meetings is retained.
