Re: DISCUSSION: should there be term limits?

["Joel M. Halpern" <joel@stevecrocker.com>]

While turnover is important, fixed term limits would be a mistake.  Todd 
seems to be asking for a rule to handle something that is better handled by 
a guideline and nomcom judgement, and we have those two things.  If we want 
to conclude that the nomcom should not apply judgement, then we have a MUCH 
bigger problem.

Yours,
Joel M. Halpern

At 09:27 PM 3/14/02 -0500, James M Galvin wrote:
> 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>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.elistx.com/subscribe>