 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ted Hardie wrote: ... > That does not mean the IETF leadership is itself a meritocracy; it's not. I believe there remains a disconnect between what people think the I* roles are (primarily service, e.g., IMO), and what those in those roles have sometimes interpreted it as (oversight based on meritocracy). > The IESG and IAB are picked by NomComs for a variety of skills and > "fit" is a critical one. Indeed. The primary metric of "fit" means: - is willing, available, and *financially* able to serve Until we remove that last metric - where roles can take upwards of 80% of someone's time, where letters of support from employers are requested, if not required, we select from among an increasingly small and increasingly biased (towards industry participants) subset. Those selected to serve would serve us all better if they kept that in mind more often. Joe
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital 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.