At 10:12 AM -0800 10/30/2003, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
the two cases that I wanted to avoid:
- it turns out that the role is not needed because of where we end up.
We need to remove it without a great fuss. - it turns out that it's the
wrong person for the job. Same problem.
I did not want to force this to be the "chair crown prince", but if it
turns out that the person is right for the chair job, it could be.
I think we can do "General AD", slot two, by talking to the NomCom chair
(though I think we need to ask them to extend the nominations deadline if
we do, since it is two weeks from tomorrow now). Having this be "Vice
Chair" is a little different, as I think it will look like "successor",
especially if the current Chair doesn't plan to re-up. Making it a one
year term increases this as a possibility and the likely perception.
For the General AD slot, I think having it be a 2 year term makes sense,
because that gives the continuity we're looking for in the event of the
other general AD not coming back. If the NomCom moves the slot two person
into slot one (by making them IETF Chair), the NomCom can then appoint a
person for one year to fit slot two; then the crab crawl of years will
work.
If we term limited the Chair role, having this be an explicit succession
might actually be a very good idea (and some organizations explicitly do
that by having a vice-chair rotate in to the Chair role after a set
time), but that requires a very different discussion with the community
on term limits.