[195796] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 2017 NANOG Elections General Information
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dave Temkin)
Sat Sep 16 04:27:45 2017
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <m2h8w7197g.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Dave Temkin <dave@temk.in>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 09:00:25 -0700
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 10:03 PM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
> > So how do we fix it?
>
> this is most strongly an american disease. nanog has encouraged and
> supported a frat boy ego parade and beauty contest. try the ietf
> nomcomm approach, but with zero white boys on the nomcomm.
>
>
Love the idea, and I agree that the elections are a popularity contest in
many cases and not a measure of who is most capable for the job. Luckily,
we've generally ended up with people who are both - but that's not always
best for the organization long term, and we generally end up with "more of
the same".
In my tenure in NANOG we've floated the idea of a nomcom a few times, but
it's generally been summarily shot down. Are you suggesting that we try and
float the idea again? I'm not 100% clear, but I believe it would require a
bylaw change.
> btw, one trick is getting more then one diverse player, so the one is
> not a martian and has peer support
>
> s/women/diversity/
>
>
Completely agree; gender is only one of various keys that are important
here. Race, age, national origin, orientation, etc. - all of these things
matter in avoiding groupthink and helping to ensure that the board is
representative of the membership that we wish to attract.
> q: how many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb
> a: one, but the light bulb has to want to change
>
>
Alternate A: Depends, are we having the conference in a union hotel?
