Re: Thinking about adding another AD in the General(ish) area

[hardie@qualcomm.com]

Leslie,

Fair enough, and I think you analysis of 1 in vice-chair, 1+ in Chair
does fit those organizations that don't do it by rotation.  I agree that
it does not seem to be where we are as a group right now.

Harald,

Based on the comments from Thomas, me, and Margaret, would you
be willing to do this as a request for a General AD (second slot), with
the discussion of whether this can be made Vice Chair, should be the
sole Gen AD with you as Chair, or would stay in the usual "two in box"
system to happen after a proposal has been published and a
discussion held?

I think we could treat this as a "late request" to the NomCom to give
them some flexibility on the deadline here, with a presumption that
they probably could fill it in the same time (but ought to have a bit
of play).

I don't personally think the IESG alone can request a vice IETF chair,
because of the IAB and other roles the Chair fills, but I'm willing to
go with the group if there are no other voices for this position.

				regards,
					Ted

At 10:29 AM -0500 10/31/2003, Leslie Daigle wrote:
>Ted,
>
>IMO, it's not a good plan to create a slot that is the Chair-elect.
>
>It's one thing to say "this person will probably be an obvious candidate", and quite another to say "this person is expected to
>take over".   In some cases, there are people who are darned
>good second-in-command that are not good chiefs.  And, tehre is
>always some gamble in picking people for slots -- if the chair elect turned out to be a bad pick, the IETF is either
>stuck with them for 4 years (2 as elect, 2 as one term of chair) or there's a constitutional crisis to not make them chair after
>2 years.  Also, this model aligns the term boundaries, so there's
>a very real risk of losing both chair & co-pilot at the same time
>(none of us are indentured.... it just feels like it ;-)
>
>While there are models of organizations that have chair-elect
>positions, it's usually more like "1 year term as -elect, and then
>3 years in the position", and I don't think we're ready to go there.
>
>More common are models where the second-seat is a logical
>person to consider for the lead position at the appropriate time,
>but is by no stretch of the imagination the only person to consider.
>
>I think that's the more appropriate model for the IETF at this
>time, if we want to go down this particular path.
>
>Leslie.
>
>hardie@qualcomm.com wrote:
>>At 12:22 PM -0800 10/30/2003, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
>>
>>>>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.
>>>
>>>so what would you suggest as adequate process for that, if "talking to the nomcom chair" once the IESG agrees to it is not adequate?
>>>
>>>Agree that the timeframe for nominations has to be extended.
>>
>>
>>How about you write what you wrote to the IESG in a wee little Internet-Draft,
>>we grant an extension to get it published as an I-D as -00, and last call the
>>sucker?  We'll get a four week community review, and we can ask the NomCom
>>to consider candidates at the same time or to be filled after.  Remember, we don't
>>have to ask the NomCom to do this job in concert with filling the rest of the
>>roles, though it might help if they knew they would have to do it (and it wouldn't
>>hurt it they happen to be able to get it done).  Or heck, ask for a second slot
>>as General AD *now* and suggest in your draft that the second slot General
>>AD be the Vice Chair of the IETF, and spell out what that means.  Would she
>>be a member of the IAB, to take one example of why this might not be an
>>IESG-only decision?
>>
>>If the community pushes back, you have a second General AD who can take
>>over the working groups and do the two-in-a-box coverage the rest of
>>us have; if it doesn't, you have a Vice Chair with a reasonably well described
>>role.
>>
>>
>>
>>>>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.
>>>
>>>The community's largely rejected explicit term limits every time the issue has been brought up.
>>>At the moment, I feel that the chair role is adequately term-limited by time-to-burnout...... another suggestion I've heard floated is that the IESG should select its own chair (with or without filling the resulting vacancy - depends on what you want the chair to be).
>>>Yet another discussion....
>>
>>
>>Using time-to-burn out is a lousy way to run a term limit, as I think we agree.  I
>>wasn't suggesting that we need term limits, but indicating that planned succession
>>can be a good thing.   It does mean whoever is planning the succession has to
>>be trusted by the later groups (that is, if NomCom 2005 effectively picks Chair 2007
>>by naming Vice Chair 2005, everyone has to be on board that that's okay).
>>
>>Are we having fun yet?
>>					Ted
>>
>
>
>--
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>"Reality:
>    Yours to discover."
>                               -- ThinkingCat
>Leslie Daigle
>leslie@thinkingcat.com
>-------------------------------------------------------------------