Lars Eggert <lars@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2020-3-26, at 19:54, Salz, Rich <rsalz=40akamai.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I want to get the largest pool of candidates.
> so that's a worthwhile goal.
> But: My guess is that any fine-tuning here would not make a huge
> difference to the size of the pool of people eligible to be considered
> as voting members.
It won't matter much for 2020/2021. It will have a knock-on effect for 2021/2022,
particularly if IETF108 is also virtual, and it will establish a precedent.
> The pool that we actually want to maximize is the sub-pool of eligible
> people *who volunteer to be considered*. If we can convince more
> eligible people to actually volunteer it would have a much more sizable
> impact (again, a guess.)
I agree, that would also help more.
(Note that the bunch of people who are most familiar with the IETF often do
*not* volunteer, because they think they might be running.
If we could invert the deadlines, somehow, that might also work more)
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
