It’s true that @Zooko was lucky enough to share some quality genetics (~50%) ;), but I don’t generally give his opinions a blank check on that basis.
Per the issue of term length, I think my argument for longer terms is distinct from @Zooko 's.
My understanding of @Zooko 's argument is that:
Longer terms gives MCRC members time to coordinate with each other.
But, I’m not really interested in analyzing that position either way, I’m sure @Zooko can if he feels like it.
My argument for longer terms is as follows:
I want the MGRC roles to be something a candidate feels like they can commit to.
Could you @secparam commit full-time to a role, foregoing other options, if the guarantee of the affiliation was 1 year? Do graduate students typically join a research program on that kind of timeline?
I will reduce the problem this way:
There are two possible MGRC-members “good/competent/diligent” and “bad/incompetent/distracted”.
In the case of the former we’d all likely agree that a longer term is better, and in the case of the latter we’d all want a shorter term.
My argument is that a shorter term increases the likelihood of the latter… or… now that I write it I realize I like the other formulation better:
a longer term increases the likelihood of the former
More specifically, a longer term that is agreed upon now would give valuable information to candidates.
To put it another way: Increasing churn in the MGRC composition increases chaos, in the very body that reputable persons might be depending on for confidence.
So, as I see it, short terms are part of defensive mindset that expects to be disappointed in the MGRC, and wants to pay a chaos-churn cost based on that expectation.
Longer terms, are more rational if paying the churn-cost is a waste… if the MGRC is competent, which again, is (I argue) more likely if candidates know the term is long enough to give a break from campaigning.
Having an initial term of one year followed by longer terms (probably) after that seems quite reasonable to me, so I think we (@secparam and I) may be in agreement (even though we’re not close genetic relatives)…
Oh… and also… MGRC members should receive ZEC-futures.