 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is one thing and one thing only that I believe term limits are good for: weakening the power of a body by reducing its experience level Do we really believe that the IESG and IAB are too powerful? Do we really want to ensure that the average level of experience on the IESG and IAB are under two years? If the average experience level of the IESG and IAB is significantly less than the paid staff, then the paid staff will be the ones that effectively determine the decision making process. If the IETF participants want there to be greater turnover on the IESG and IAB there are mechanisms to do so: nominate more and better candidates volunteer to serve on nomcom be proactive in providing nomcom feedback on the candidates I do not believe we need or in reality want to place arbitrary MUSTs or SHOULDs when it comes to the length of time someone can serve. Jeffrey Altman P.S. - being curious: what are the max terms for the IESG and IAB in their history? what are the average terms for the IESG and IAB in their history? what are the average and max terms of the current participants?
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.