> On 5 Sep 2017, at 12:30, Denesh Bhabuta <[email protected]> wrote: > > That said, should we be looking at term limits etc in the future, to allow > new blood to come forward too? All too easy for newcomers not to put > themselves forward when more experienced people and those doing it for years > are still up for the task.
Hi Denesh. I agree that term limits are a good thing, largely for the reasons you've outlined. [It also helps to have a healthy turnover in the leadership from time to time.] However the WG did not make provision for this in its chair appointment process. I don't know (or care) why it did that: presumably there were good reasons for reaching consensus on that process. It would probably be unwise to revisit the WG chair appointment process given the potential for shed-painting and rat-holing. If it's not broken, don't "fix" it. I would like to think we can trust the WG leadership to know when they'd overstayed their welcome and to step aside in an orderly manner. I did that in the DNS WG even though that WG's process does have provision for term limits.
