Sam, Can we please stop the hairsplitting ?
It is not the IESG's fault if you feel that the nomcom is taking the IESG input as absolute software style 'requirements' as opposed to often more lightly interpreted 'job requirements' as desirable from the IESG's perspective. Please take that message to the nomcom if you wish. The grander picture here is that there will be a session where the community can discuss the topic of what to do with the TSV area director position. You are part of that community and I have no doubt that you will be given a chance to speak up. This session is clearly not about the finer details of the nomcom process. David Kessens --- On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 10:41:55AM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote: > >>>>> "Martin" == Martin Stiemerling <martin.stiemerl...@neclab.eu> writes: > > Martin> Hi Margaret, I will answer as the agenda below is out of the > Martin> TSVAREA session. > > Martin> On 03/07/2013 03:21 PM, Margaret Wasserman wrote: > >> > > Hi Russ, > >> > >> On Mar 5, 2013, at 11:18 AM, Russ Housley <hous...@vigilsec.com> > >> wrote: > >>> The rest of your question ought to be discussed at the TSVAREA > >>> meeting in Orlando. > >> > >> I have looked at the agenda of the TSV Area Open Meeting (on > >> Wednesday from 9:00am to 11:30am), and it includes the following > >> item: > >> > >> "- Open Mic about "Area Expectations for the TSV ADs" -- 60 > >> minutes The questions we will ask the community: - what is the > >> existing description we gave to NomCom. - does the community > >> agree with it? - is it reasonable, or are we asking too much?" > >> > >> By "description we gave to the NomCom" do you mean the IESG's > >> list of desired criteria? Is the NomCom also going to report on > >> the criteria that they came up with, after considering the IESG's > >> input and whatever input they received from the community? > > Martin> The IESG has sent these requirements [1] to the nomcom, as > Martin> stated on that site. That's what is meant with "what is the > Martin> existing description we gave to NomCom". > > Hi, after reading your message I still don't understand the answer to > Margaret's question. > > Also, I'd like to remind you that the IESg does not send requirements to > the nomcom. According to RFC 3777 the IESG sends a set of desired > expertise. The nomcom develops a set of required qualifications based > on these and community input. > > It's not just a semantic point. I think over the years the IESG has > started to believe that the IESG rather the community sets the job > requirements for ADs. I'd like to ask IESG members especially to be > very careful about the terminology and to respect the process. David Kessens ---
