SUMMARY: should there be term limits?

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

SPEAKING AS EDITOR:

There has been some additional discussion on this point which suggested
that we need to document explicitly whether or not there are term
limits.

I am no longer certain there is an absolute majority in favor of either
point of view on the question of term limits.  The current document
clearly infers that an incumbent is to be favored unless a superior
candidate can be identified.  The argument in favor of term limits is
that the longer an incumbent serves the harder it is for a NOMCOM to
choose to replace them, in addition to the more general desire to get
"fresh blood" in the leadership.  The argument against term limits is
that it can be very difficult to find replacement candidates and if you
have someone willing and able to serve we should let them continue to do
so.

In "deadlock" situation I would propose we not change the existing
implicit rule as follows:

    PROPOSED CONSENSUS: There should be no term limits and we should
    document this explicitly.

If you disagree with the PROPOSED CONSENSUS please reply to the list.
If you agree do nothing.  Note that a future message will propose actual
and specific textual changes to the document.

Thanks,

Jim