Re: Question regarding new rules for Mid term vacancies

[Brian E Carpenter <brian@hursley.ibm.com>]

imho, this is actually a separate issue.

I don't think we should worry about overlap of the two Nomcom
memberships as far as mid-term vacancies go. If someone has been
duly picked for both Nomcoms, let it be.

The issue is whether we want to protect the Nomcom in general against
repeat membership. But I find it hard to argue that if X volunteers
every year, and gets picked at random two years running, that this 
offends democratic principles. 

   Brian

Avri Doria wrote:
> 
> The current draft includes changes for overlapping
> the terms of the old nomcom and the new nomcom by 3 months
> in the case that a mid-term vacancy needs to be filled.
> 
> This text has been discussed on the list and in the WG meeting
> and I believe that it is approaching consensus.  There is one
> major pending sub-issue that does not not have consensus and has
> not yet been discussed on this list, though it did have a brief
> though inconclusive discussion during the meeting.
> 
> This is the question of whether the voting members of one
> year's nomcom should be excluded from volunteering or serving
> as voting members on the following year's nomcom.
> 
> Please contribute your ideas on this issue or any issue having
> to do with the Mid term vacancy text.  I will try to determine
> the WG consensus on this by Jan 1 2003.
> 
> thanks
> a.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.elistx.com/subscribe>