Subject: Re: Re: REMINDER: revision to RFC2727 - NOMCOM

From: Ersue Mehmet <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 00:03:50 +0100

At 10:32 AM -0800 1/25/02, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>At 8:50 AM -0800 1/25/02, Dave Crocker wrote:
>>At 10:34 AM 1/25/2002 -0500, James M Galvin wrote:
>>>I just wanted to call your attention to the recently announced proposed
>>>revision:
>>
>>Perhaps the best time for pursuing revisions to this document is 
>>immediately after the nomcom has done it job.  That way you will 
>>have a pool of very fresh suggestions to work from.
>>
>>(and this suggestion is coming from someone on the current nomcom 
>>who is explicitly offering to participate on that basis, but also 
>>feels that it would not be appropriate to participate in the middle 
>>of the major nomcom deliberations.)
>
>As someone who was on a previous nomcom, I fully agree with Dave. It 
>would have been silly to think about this while in the midst of 
>deliberations that could affect what I said.
>
>--Paul Hoffman, Director
>--Internet Mail Consortium

I fully agree with Paul and Dave. We are working hard at Nomcom these days.
Please give us some time to finish the heavy work period. We will be able to give 
much more stable comments after that.

Regards,
Mehmet Ersue

---

From: James M Galvin <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 10:55:23 -0500 (EST)

On Sun, 27 Jan 2002, Ersue Mehmet wrote:

    I fully agree with Paul and Dave. We are working hard at Nomcom
    these days.  Please give us some time to finish the heavy work
    period. We will be able to give much more stable comments after
    that.

The document will proceed at whatever pace the discussion permits, which
at least means the document will not be done before the current task in
front of this year's NOMCOM is completed.

Jim

---

From: Theodore Tso <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 18:49:58 -0500

> period. We will be able to give much more stable comments after

I've been accumulating a punch list of ways in which the nomcom
process was rough this year, and how it could be improved.
(Unfortunately, a lot of it boils down to "give the nomcom chair
secretarial/executive assistant support", which may not be
possible/practical, but we'll see.)  

I'm not planning on participating on the ietf-nomcom discussion until
we finish up, though, since it's been a bit of stretch to have time to
do my nomcom duties, nevermind my other IETF and work commitments....
So after we finish the current nomcom process, I'll try to write up my
experiences and send them to the list.

						- Ted