From sm@elandsys.com Fri Aug 2 15:12:24 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-nomcom@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-nomcom@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CF2B11E80F9 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 15:12:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.562 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.562 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.038, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AQC3Fm-y3MCb for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 15:12:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8E6F11E80D7 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 15:12:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.129.17]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r72MC2OT017284 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 2 Aug 2013 15:12:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1375481536; bh=SlKXRXyONDvdx+JmQ/gi8hcQHB1gfUHV/j4d/lUFiSU=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=43FZWSKzqq4k9ixULn6pfYssdy/XFwgpJPYHQxbqoxxbvEWV1U15Jc2jw2x9grHBT Vw6JxLVsW18v4uqr7tZNG83pwbHXUG6xxcMaY2axvYIUx3VpD/1MTlL0WX+MRUb7+B g8dj4dydGNUFR3rrdU185/fD3vMB/YQEN/0oRg3w= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1375481536; i=@elandsys.com; bh=SlKXRXyONDvdx+JmQ/gi8hcQHB1gfUHV/j4d/lUFiSU=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=qtypj/zMHQOhM9hwFSZ0x3Z0puODv1dZ/BsIZHPtg5RtYVbs/OaVhtXeVK7Jj3AXr cXKFdyuGbj8ddQxvbyCxlP2hBuySHPNoAFxnWOovpE33iHGcgO5A3fEO9tWkweJb+i OfOtI6Vxu9A1y3fIzb2q8x9qNuvBNYsHNljuB69o= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20130802144528.0d72db50@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 15:11:26 -0700 To: Michael Richardson From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: <7005.1375463010@sandelman.ca> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130730022629.0b408308@elandnews.com> <32379.1375179842@sandelman.ca> <6.2.5.6.2.20130730034456.0d81a700@elandnews.com> <21977.1375188403@sandelman.ca> <6.2.5.6.2.20130730072017.0d2397d0@elandnews.com> <12009.1375197220@sandelman.ca> <6.2.5.6.2.20130730085204.0d6ca950@elandnews.com> <7005.1375463010@sandelman.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: ietf-nomcom@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ietf-nomcom] Nominating Committee Process: Eligibility - draft-moonesamy-nomcom-eligibility-01 X-BeenThere: ietf-nomcom@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions of possible revisions to the NomCom process List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 22:12:24 -0000 Hi Michael, At 10:03 02-08-2013, Michael Richardson wrote: >I don't think that I understand your sentence. I cannot quantify "not significantly". It is easier for me to err by reading it as "not different". >I mean that I don't think that your change in rule will make very many people >eligible who were not already eligible, nor will it keep people eligible when >there are reasons why they can not travel. > >In particular, I think that if we want more gendre and age equity, then we >must be aware of this childbirth constraint on travel (on both men and women). Ok. Dave Crocker mentioned the word "participatory" a few weeks ago. I would like to use it capture what you mentioned above. Adrian Farrel mentioned the following: "I find it interesting that the competing tensions of "make sure there is a set of more experienced people on NomCom" and "widen NomCom to allow broader participation" might be solved by the same measure." I would look at the proposal from that perspective. Regards, S. Moonesamy From mcr@sandelman.ca Fri Aug 2 10:05:08 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-nomcom@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-nomcom@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2028D11E8105 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 10:05:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.397 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.202, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aN4lbZ3oYJXO for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 10:05:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3::184]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD90521E8107 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 10:05:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3848320170; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 14:11:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 7741F63A7C; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 13:03:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6535963A5E; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 13:03:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Richardson To: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130730085204.0d6ca950@elandnews.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130730022629.0b408308@elandnews.com> <32379.1375179842@sandelman.ca> <6.2.5.6.2.20130730034456.0d81a700@elandnews.com> <21977.1375188403@sandelman.ca> <6.2.5.6.2.20130730072017.0d2397d0@elandnews.com> <12009.1375197220@sandelman.ca> <6.2.5.6.2.20130730085204.0d6ca950@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: MH-E 8.2; nmh 1.3-dev; GNU Emacs 23.4.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 15:01:15 -0700 Cc: ietf-nomcom@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ietf-nomcom] Nominating Committee Process: Eligibility - draft-moonesamy-nomcom-eligibility-01 X-BeenThere: ietf-nomcom@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions of possible revisions to the NomCom process List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 17:05:08 -0000 --=-=-= S Moonesamy wrote: > There will be cases, as mentioned above, where a person will not be > NomCom-eligible. I do not think that it is not relevant. The previous > questions were to try and get a sense of what people consider as making the > difference. >> > - Will it help people with experience be NomCom-eligible? >> >> it is better than before, but not significantly. > I read "not significantly" as meaning that it does not make the difference > between now and what is being proposed. I don't think that I understand your sentence. I mean that I don't think that your change in rule will make very many people eligible who were not already eligible, nor will it keep people eligible when there are reasons why they can not travel. In particular, I think that if we want more gendre and age equity, then we must be aware of this childbirth constraint on travel (on both men and women). >> In the meantime, subscribing is never wrong ... > I am subscribed. :-) My message triggered an anti-abuse rule. That is why > it went to the moderation queue. I thought I was subscribed, but I might not be. -- Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQCVAwUBUfvTyoqHRg3pndX9AQJtvAP8CZfBtFNXK1knwKMA1seDtiSCdIegbGcf bZBK1TL3ws6Cd0rOnTJV1aYfNyyxIA7lfXjocVA3dyX6tJEQ2pXoIRG8d0mQl/QM +y47czRphi97oP06ncScmPya6ZjeuW5jAG+NsA7UiggrmyqPA2thBCiVl58X6wN1 mYip80Pguh8= =Ew2x -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From mcr@sandelman.ca Mon Aug 5 09:18:02 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-nomcom@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-nomcom@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0BA221F9F5F for ; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 09:18:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.089, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6pSyiU0UZ+Eo for ; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 09:17:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3::184]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 228ED21F9ED4 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 09:17:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandelman.ca (desk.marajade.sandelman.ca [209.87.252.247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D68862018B; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 13:24:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 04EE063A88; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 12:16:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4B8563732; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 12:16:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Richardson To: ietf-nomcom@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20130802144528.0d72db50@elandnews.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20130730022629.0b408308@elandnews.com> <32379.1375179842@sandelman.ca> <6.2.5.6.2.20130730034456.0d81a700@elandnews.com> <21977.1375188403@sandelman.ca> <6.2.5.6.2.20130730072017.0d2397d0@elandnews.com> <12009.1375197220@sandelman.ca> <6.2.5.6.2.20130730085204.0d6ca950@elandnews.com> <7005.1375463010@sandelman.ca> <6.2.5.6.2.20130802144528.0d72db50@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: MH-E 8.2; nmh 1.3-dev; GNU Emacs 23.4.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 15:01:15 -0700 Cc: S Moonesamy Subject: Re: [ietf-nomcom] Nominating Committee Process: Eligibility - draft-moonesamy-nomcom-eligibility-01 X-BeenThere: ietf-nomcom@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions of possible revisions to the NomCom process List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 16:18:02 -0000 --=-=-= S Moonesamy wrote: > Hi Michael, > At 10:03 02-08-2013, Michael Richardson wrote: >> I don't think that I understand your sentence. > I cannot quantify "not significantly". It is easier for me to err by reading > it as "not different". Yes, I agree. I am saying that I do not think the eligible set will be different. Your proposal solves no problems, but causes no harm in my opinion. > Dave Crocker mentioned the word "participatory" a few weeks ago. I would > like to use it capture what you mentioned above. Adrian Farrel mentioned the > following: > "I find it interesting that the competing tensions of "make sure there > is a set of more experienced people on NomCom" and "widen NomCom to > allow broader participation" might be solved by the same measure." I think that it would be great. I don't know what measure would do this, though. -- ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [ ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [ -- Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQCVAwUBUf/P04qHRg3pndX9AQI/2AP8CAIrfsrbO39y+83tG/adVQ5lQih0TezK lSeOTkdpDteLoq7IU2NjhgkWRJ6+y3MQkwxxBD9Joho9M2E8ldd4iqyDLwYPHEEB gXuOuj22XEnIfR5T1LCs28HKmh0q7E2dTAUmpgvvyWPG839tmyIY1a1wbzE+eNaZ A0CX0r6ms3Q= =bREA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--