Re: IESG Issue 2

[Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>]

I think Scott is correct that there is an asymmetry.

An IAB member moving to an IESG position simply increases the number
of identical IAB slots to fill. The process should not require a new call for
nominees. What is described in the draft is appropriate.

An IESG member moving to the IAB creates an unannounced specific vacancy in 
the IESG. The process should require a new call for nominees.

I think the text needs to be revised to include this asymmetry.

   Brian

Scott Bradner wrote:
> 
> I see little reason to do a new search if the case is someone with
> time left in their IAB term moving from the IAB to the IESG. I do
> not see a realistic problem that would be solved by doing so.  The
> community suggested people for the IAB already in the process and
> the IAB members should be generalists (i.e. no IAB topic-specific
> seats)
> 
> but the case of an IESG member with time left in their term
> being moved to the IAB or another IESG seat should cause a
> new call for nominees to fill the open IESG seat
> 
> (while moving in mid term from the IESG to the IAB might not
> have happened I can easily see the case (its not all that different
> from someone just quiting being an IESG member which does happen)
> 
> Scott