DISCUSSION: should there be term limits?

[James M Galvin <galvin+ietf-nomcom@eListX.com>]

Please use this message with this subject line to continue the thread on
term limits.

Thanks!

Jim



On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, todd glassey wrote:

    Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 16:38:59 -0800
    From: todd glassey <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>
    To: Brian E Carpenter <brian@hursley.ibm.com>
    Cc: Robert Elz <kre@MUNNARI.OZ.AU>,
         James M Galvin <galvin+ietf-nomcom@eListX.com>,
         ietf-nomcom@lists.elistx.com, poised@lists.tislabs.com
    Subject: Re: Final Call: accept incorporated comments


    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Brian E Carpenter" <brian@hursley.ibm.com>
    To: "todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>
    Cc: "Robert Elz" <kre@MUNNARI.OZ.AU>; "James M Galvin"
    <galvin+ietf-nomcom@eListX.com>; <ietf-nomcom@lists.elistx.com>;
    <poised@lists.tislabs.com>
    Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 1:26 PM
    Subject: Re: Final Call: accept incorporated comments


    > todd glassey wrote:
    > ...
    > > I want to put term limits on all sitting roles and appoitments. 2-4
    years is
    > > certainly enough one would think. The idea is to incourage participation
    and
    > > by having the same people all the time run the WG's and act as the AD's
    > > there is not as much new blood available for growth.
    >
    > I am very strongly against term limits (speaking as somebody who will step
    > down voluntarily next Wednesday evening). In fact we do *not* have an
    infinite
    > pool of talented and available people, and constraining the NomCom's
    choices
    > by arbitrary term limits would be a major blunder.
    >
    > We do need turnover, but not on an arbitrary timescale.

    Then how would you suggest effecting this turnover process.  I am not
    adverse to retaing real producers, its just that this is a place where there
    needs to be a lot of new blood involved I think. To stagnate in the role is
    dangerous to all!.

    >
    > > Especially when those
    > > in power resists any changes to the powerbase.
    >
    > Nonsense. This isn't about power, it's about getting good people who
    > are willing to serve.

    No sorry - It is exactly about power. Its about getting more than the same
    two people who are willig to servre in there becuase those that are serving
    allow it. If you have any doubts of this go over the key postions within the
    WG's, theIESG, and the IAN for the last couple of years and what you will
    find is a core grouping of people that ARE this organization and a number of
    others that participate on a per-instance basis.

    >
    >    Brian
    >


    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
    manager: <http://lists.elistx.com/subscribe>