On 9 Oct 2007, at 16:57, William B. Norton wrote:
On 10/8/07, Paul Ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
For instance: I made an offer a few weeks back to give a presentation
on what ISPs could to do to help in fighting cyber crime. I was told
that I need to follow "this procedure" and submit a proposal, etc.,
which is fine - I suppose. But it seems I have an easier time talking
at other venues as "invited talks" where I don't have to jump through
hoops to justify the content to a group of people who should already
know me, and the quality of my content/context.
The current charter mandates that all PC members review all
presentations submitted for NANOG. No flexibility here.
the charter is a working document..
There is a charter amendment on the upcoming election to strike
that text so the PC will have the ability to self manage their
process of recruiting and selecting talks and speakers.
One can envision for example a variety of program committee
solutions including assigning a 90 minute section of the agenda to
a group of 3 pc members with expertise in routing, who recruit and
coordinate the best speakers they can find in this area on topics
of significance to the NANOG community. Their participation in the
pc could then be valued based on the quality of that section of the
agenda. Etc. There are many ways to self organize to create an
agenda besides everyone submits a form and everyone reviews
everything.
i'm not sure that sounds like improvement. why cant the charter just
allow them to decide a presentation is worth having without going
through all the hoops that Paul mentions if its appropriate?
Steve
