Re:

[Donald Eastlake 3rd <dee3@torque.pothole.com>]

I wouldd suggest changing it to

"Members of the IETF community must have paid for registration at and 
attended at least 2 of the last 3 IETF meetings in order to volunteer."

Paying for registration is a pretty clear thing which usually creates
even more of a paper trail and this avoids any confusion with the fact
that you can register early via the IETF web site and then never pay.

There really hasn't been any problem with determining attendence that I
can tell, which is currently determined by the Secretariate. The list of
volunteers is made public so people can protest those they think are not
qualified although if there is a name no one recognizes that would be
unlikely.

I am writing this at the IEEE 802.11/802.15/802.18/802.19 joint Iterim
Meeting in Monterey, California. They have pretty clear rules of the
type we could adopt if we wanted. In particular, attendence at an 802
meeting is defined as attending at least 75% of the time slots (morning
/ afternoon / evening) and attendence at a time slot is defined as
physically being at a business meeting during 90% of the time of that
time slot. Of course, in IEEE 802 things are decided by voting so voting
rights, which are based on meeting attendence, are very important. And,
of course, they really don't have a mechanism to check all this with
much certainty.

I don't think we need something that harsh, but we could add something
like

"Attending an IETF meeting is defined as being physically present at and
enterning the required identification information on the attendence list
at at least three non-overlapping IETF working group meetings."

This isn't perfect or perfectly enforceable. I think those who use one
day attendence as a basis for nomcom eligibility are violating the
spirit of the nomcom requirement. Still, I think this suggested rule is
a reasonable minimum requirement.

I don't want to re-argue the whose basis for nomcom eligiblity but we 
have gone over it time and time again and consistently had a consensus 
that, while by no means perfect, the IETF meeting physical attendence 
requirement is the simplest way to do more or less what we want. The 
fact that attendence can not be perfectly determined does not require 
that we abandon that.

Donald

On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Marshall Rose wrote:

> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 08:55:53 -0700
> From: Marshall Rose <mrose+internet.ietf.nomcom@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
> To: Phil Roberts <PRoberts@MEGISTO.com>
> Cc: ietf-nomcom@lists.elistx.com, PRoberts@MEGISTO.com
> Subject: Re:
> 
> >      I'd like to recommend changing
> > 
> > "Members of the IETF community must have attended at least 2 of the last 3
> > IETF meetings in order to volunteer. "
> > to
> > 
> > "Members of the IETF community must have registered for and attended at
> > least 2 of the last 3 IETF meetings in order to volunteer."
> > 
> > in 2727bis.
> > 
> > There were a couple of folks who had attended but not registered and who
> > volunteered to serve.  I took the decision not to allow
> > this, broadly interpreting attendance to include registration.
> > Registration is what is being checked to determine whether the
> > volunteers are qualified.
> 
> i'm going to suggest the opposite. perhaps we should change it to:
> 
> > "Members of the IETF community must have registered for at
> > least 2 of the last 3 IETF meetings in order to volunteer."
> 
> the reason is that it's fairly simple to demonstrate that someone
> registered. it is problematic to determine if someone actually
> attended.
> 
> if i just show up, collect my badge, and get back on the plane does
> that count as "attendence". what if i'm there for one meeting, one
> day, or one week?
> 
> /mtr
> 
> ps: although i appreciate your inclusive instincts, if these guys
> attended and didn't pay, i think giving them the boot would be more
> appropriate. however, they get to slide by based on the wording
> currently in effect.

======================================================================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd                       dee3@torque.pothole.com
 155 Beaver Street              +1-508-634-2066(h) +1-508-851-8280(w)
 Milford, MA 01757 USA                   Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com