Re: PROPOSED GUIDELINE: balance

[Matt Holdrege <matt.holdrege@verizon.net>]

At 07:40 AM 4/4/2002, Robert Elz wrote:
>     Date:        Thu, 04 Apr 2002 06:22:48 -0800
>     From:        Matt Holdrege <matt.holdrege@verizon.net>
>     Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.2.20020404062054.02b541d0@mail.verizon.net>
>
>   | But the random process of selection insures that no country will be
>   | favored. Of course if the majority of volunteers is from North America...
>
> The criteria for being a volunteer are *heavily* biased in favour of
> North American residents.   The requirement states that you must have
> attended 2 of the past 3 IETF meetings.   Guess how many of the last 3
> IETF meetings will have been in North America?   And guess how many
> will have been in any other particular region of the world...

Well a great many of us American's fly to the foreign locations for IETF's 
so I don't know why others can't fly here. In fact, most anyone who is 
serious about their involvement in standards has to fly an awful lot what 
with RIPE, APNIC, ISOC, ITU, ETSI, etc meetings all over the world. If it's 
not important, you don't go. That's a good way to filter out nomcom 
volunteers who don't see the IETF as really important. I know travel sucks 
for folks who live down under, but that's the burden you bear for living in 
paradise. :)

> It turns out I have been eligible to volunteer for the nomcom exactly
> once - I did volunteer, and missed selection.   While I spent 4 years on
> the IAB, and have (briefly) been a WG chair, a doc editor, ... I have
> not otherwise been eligible for the nomcom.
>
>   | I understand the problem and dearly sympathize with it, but any 
> change to
>   | the random nature of selection would not be good.
>
> It wasn't the nomcom that was meant, no-one is suggesting changing the
> method of selection there (though changing the eligibility comes up
> again and again - and since the nomcom doc is being revised, that's an
> issue that should probably be considered yet again).
>
> The issue who who the nomcom should appoint to the IAB, and what guidance
> they should be given.

Apologies for getting emails mixed up. This is a busy list.

As for guidance, that is simple. The nomcom should consider the outlook or 
world view of any candidate, be they for IESG or IAB. If that world-view is 
limited to the United States, that's a serious knock against a candidate in 
my opinion.