Listing affiliations (Re: OPEN ISSUE: WG Chair Selection (in general))

[Bob Hinden]

Harald,

At 11:16 PM 5/27/2003, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

>>A bit different.  I think it is important to always show the company
>>affiliations of IAB, IESG, Nomcom, working group chairs, and document
>>authors.  Having this information be hidden or murkey can give the
>>appearance of "corporate game playing" too.  Much better if everything be
>>in the open and transparent.
>
>good point. especially considering that I know that even after a bit of 
>research, at least 2 and probably more of the affilliations in your table 
>are still wrong!

Right, my point exactly.  It shouldn't be a mystery or require research.

>On the other hand, including the corporate information *everywhere* the 
>names get listed seems like overkill, and against our principle of 
>considering the person-as-an-individual (as well as increasing overhead). 
>Where would you suggest we list them?

On the IAB and IESG member pages, in the nomcom announcements (members and 
selections), and on working group charter pages (for w.g. chairs).  I think 
that would be fine and we don't need to go any further.

>(btw.... I use a non-Cisco email address because the corporate mail system 
>doesn't work well for me, as well as liking the stability - I've had this 
>email through 3 different employers - but the front page of my website 
>tells you where I work....)

It's a fairly common problem these days.  Many people in the IETF have 
their IETF roles continue while they change employers multiple times and/or 
have corporate email systems that are less than ideal.

Thanks,
Bob