Re: [ietf-nomcom] Changing the candidate selection model

["Joel M. Halpern" <jmh at joelhalpern.com>]

I believe most nomcoms understand that turnover is important.  So far, 
the community has refrained from turning that into a hard and fast rule, 
which I think is a good thing.
Looking at the history, there has been consistent turnover at about the 
level I would like to see, or maybe a bit faster than I am think is 
really desirable, but within reason.

Yours,
Joel

Christian Huitema wrote:
> > THe basic problem is when it is not clear cut whether the nomcom should
> > re-appoint a given sitting individual.  Assume that the person has
> > served two terms.  (The single term cases confuse the issue.)  We do
> > not, and should not in my opinion, have a rule that says "out after
> > two."  So the nomcom has to evaluate the person...
>
> I understand the desire to not have term limits, but such limits are actually the best way to avoid the failure mode I fear most, the "old boyz club". If there is not some kind of limit, or at least encouragement to the nomcom to "get new blood", incumbents can be there for life, as long as they are not grossly incompetent, or bored.
>
> -- Christian Huitema