Re: DISCUSSION: define the role of a liaison

[Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>]

    Date:        Wed, 13 Mar 2002 16:15:54 -0500 (EST)
    From:        James M Galvin <galvin+ietf-nomcom@eListX.com>
    Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.43.0203131551300.24968-100000@three.elistx.com>

  | So it would seem the liaisons should either be voting members or not,
  | and we should make this clear.

Of course they're not voting members, and shouldn't be, if that had ever
been intended, that's what would have been said.

But I also don't know what the problem is supposed to be - the nomcom
chair is also not a voting member, and yet participates in all the
discussions, etc - perhaps the nomcom members might like to exclude the
chair sometimes too.

If there's been a problem that actually needs fixing, I'd like someone to
(at a minimum) propose some language that would actually fix the problem
that was actually encountered (better if the actual problem can be explained
as well, but that might not be possible).

Without that, do nothing at all.

kre