You raise two questions about making the candidate list public.
You raise the question of whether we can afford the loss of candidates from
those people not willing to be seen as losing. I will admit to not being
sure I understand the driver for people who both have that concern and
could do the job of AD. (I can see it for IAB membership.) I can't swear
that we won't lose one or two vialbe candidates, but I tend to doubt it.
You also ask about the nuances. The details / constraints / parameters for
a volunteer would, I think, still be confidential. I can't see any problem
with that information being only in the hands of the nomcom. The public
will not be able to tell that the nomcom might have chosen a different
person but for some constraints. (Heck, that is probably always the case.)
There is one reason I have heard occasionally that I wonder about. If the
list is made public, will this cause public second guessing based on
insufficient information after the results are announced. That, I think,
would be a serious problem.
And there is some risk (small, I think) of people pushing others to endorse
them. This would seem easier with a public list, because the nomcom is not
left wondering why they got the supportive email.
On balance, I think we would be significantly better off with a public list
because of the ability to get much wider feedback.
At 09:18 AM 5/7/2005, John C Klensin wrote:
... initial discussion of publishing candidates elided ...
Even assuming that publishing candidate lists would result in
better-quality feedback and permit the Nomcom to make better
choices among plausibly-appropriate candidates, please look at
the other side. There are people in the community who, for
whatever reassons, find the prospect of a "volunteer, have that
public, and then not be selected" process sufficiently painful
to prevent them from volunteering... or certainly from
volunteering more than once or twice. There are also subtle
differences in how one can volunteer that can be expressed in
confidence to the Nomcom: "I don't really want to do this, but
will serve if you conclude that it is important and I'm the best
choice" or "I can't work with X and would accept the position
only if X were not selected" are comments that can be made
today, but which don't show up on public lists. I believe that
many of the people who would semi-volunteer with such conditions
would decline to volunteer at all if their names would go on an
undifferentiated public list.
So, those of you who strongly advocate a public list... What
percentage of the already-too-small potential candidate pool are
you willing to lose? Are you convinced that anyone with
sensitivities or conditions similar to those outlined above
would make a bad AD if selected? Do you think the tradeoffs
are worth it?
Ietf mailing list
Ietf mailing list