Selecting leadership, take 2

[avri doria]

I think your proposal would work. One addition:

I would recommend that the person chosen for the problem
phase also be responsible for suggesting, i.e. writing up,
a process to be followed for the solution proposal stage.

a.

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> ok, talking to people does tend to give perspectives.
> 
> the nomcom chair has assured me that he thinks adding this to nomcom's 
> agenda will disrupt their schedule, add to their burden and be generally 
> bothersome.
> 
> people on this list have indicated that they think that picking someone 
> quickly is a good idea.
> 
> people (some on this list) have told me that I don't get to duck the 
> responsibility no matter what I do, but I can ask anyone for advice.
> 
> some people have pointed out that it's not exactly clear what I want 
> that someone to volunteer for
> 
> and some people have suggested names.
> 
> so here's a suggestion:
> 
> - we focus on a leadership role for the "problem description" phase - from
>  now on until San Francisco.
> 
> - we formally state intent to charter this as a working group
>  One work item for the group is process for picking leadership of the
>  next phase.
> 
> - I write up a "role description" and post it on ietf-announce
> 
> - People can send me names. I can verify whether or not they will be 
> willing
>  to do the job.
> 
> - I ask the nomcom chair for advice. He can ask his committee if he 
> wants it.
> 
> - I make the selection, based on the advice I get.
> 
> Queries:
> 
> - Make the nominee list public? (see nomcom wg's archives for 
> pro-et-contra)
> 
> - Timing? Is 2 weeks from now enough time to do this?
> 
> the thing has the property that we can spend infinite energy on deciding 
> on a process, instead of using the process to focus on the problems...
> 
>                   Harald
> 
> 


-- 
Avri Doria
http://www.sm.luth.se/~avri/