Re: DISCUSSION: TERM LIMITS - Was Re: Final Call: accept incorporated comments

[Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>]

> > Few people
> > can spare the time to serve more than a few years at one
> > of these jobs, and the few that can do so provide valuable
> > continuity and
> 
> Garbage 

Excrement!  (is not!  is too!)

> - lets plot the last 100 or so members of the management tree and
> find out

by all means, feel free to gather data.   while you're at it, check 
to see how many former IESG and/or IAB members have ceased contributing 
to IETF  following their terms, due to stress-induced medical problems, 
burnout, and/or frustration with incompetent idiots.

>     1)    how many serve in the same or other positions within the IETF,
> IESG, IAB, or ISOC, i.e. who have been elected for life. 

heaven forbid that IESG and IAB should be populated with people who 
have experience elsewhere in IETF.  clearly everyone on these bodies 
should be new to the organization.  and heaven forbid that ISOC have 
some people who have technical expertise from participating in IETF.  
not that it's relevant since ISOC does not influence IETF technical 
decisions.

>     2)    how many of those sitting are involved in commentary stating that
> the IETF should remain Status Quo -
> 
> I think this diligence will be interesting. Especially when it becomes
> evident who is most opposed to change.

it's perfectly reasonable for people who understand how the orgainzation
works to be opposed to proposals for internal changes to the workings
of that organization that are made by people who don't understand how the
organization works.  deluded people do not make good architects, for 
either network protocols or organizaitons.

Keith