Adrian, I accept your amendment; thank you. Barry On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 3:55 PM Adrian Farrel <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Barry, > > >> If we have to form a recall committee in the period before we have worked > >> out a long-term solution, I presume the same rules will apply. I think it > >> would be wise to fill this hole now because if we need it (which we won't) > >> then we'll need to sort it out in a real hurry. > > > > Given that the recall process in BCP 10 explicitly refers to the > > NomCom eligibility and process, I think that what's important is to be > > clear that the scope of this document does include anything that's > > tied to that process. > > Thanks. I really appreciate what you're trying to do here. > > > So how about this instead?: > > > >> Abstract > >> OLD > >> This document only affects the seating of the > >> 2020-2021 NomCom, and does not set a precedent for the future. > > > > NEW > > This document only affects the seating of the > > 2020-2021 NomCom and any rules that relate to the > > NomCom process before IETF 108, and does not set a > > precedent for the future. > > END > > I have a pedant's concern that the "recall process" is not the "NomCom process". > > In your preamble you said "NomCom eligibility and process" and I feel that captures it better, so in the spirit of negotiation, how about... > This document only affects the seating of the > 2020-2021 NomCom and any rules that relate to > NomCom eligibility or process before IETF 108, and > does not set a precedent for the future. > > >> Section 1 > >> OLD > >> The 2020-2021 Nominating Committee (NomCom) needs to be formed > >> between IETF 107 and IETF 108, and the issue of eligibility of who > >> can serve on that NomCom needs clarification: a one-time > >> interpretation of the eligibility rules is required for this > >> particular exceptional situation, given the tight timeframe for > >> seating this year's NomCom. > > > > NEW > > The 2020-2021 Nominating Committee (NomCom) needs to be formed > > between IETF 107 and IETF 108, and the issue of eligibility of who > > can serve on that NomCom needs clarification: a one-time > > interpretation of the eligibility rules is required for this > > particular exceptional situation. That interpretation will apply > > to the seating of that NomCom and to any rules that relate > > to the NomCom process before IETF 108. > > END > > Similarly: > ...and to any rules that relate to NomCom eligibility before IETF 108. > > >> Section 3 > >> OLD > >> This update is an emergency interpretation of the intent of BCP 10 > >> for this current exceptional situation only, and applies only to the > >> 2020-2021 NomCom, which is expected to be seated prior to IETF 108. > >> It will explicitly not apply to any future NomCom and does not set > >> precedent: another update to BCP 10 will be necessary to address > >> future eligibility, as there will be time for proper community work > >> on such an update. > > > > NEW > > This update is an emergency interpretation of the intent of BCP 10 > > for this current exceptional situation only, and applies only to the > > 2020-2021 NomCom, which is expected to be seated prior to IETF 108, > > and to any rules that relate to the NomCom process before IETF 108. > > It will explicitly not apply to any future NomCom and does not set > > precedent: another update to BCP 10 will be necessary to address > > future eligibility, as there will be time for proper community work > > on such an update. > > END > > And again: > s/relate to the NomCom process/relate to NomCom eligibility/ > > Cheers, > Adrian > -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
