Sorry for late response.
Let me follow this up a bit.
I've been encouraging people to try to sort through reasons and
things that would make it different on another thread, but I
think we have a "choice of potential candidates" problem today.
The IESG and IAB received "very few real choices" reports from
several nomcoms while I was serving there. Possibly things have
gotten better, but I have my doubts.
=> I would challenge this assumption. From what I've seen (I saw
the list of some of the nominees lately) I don't think we have
a shortage. Of course shortage of quality is a matter of personal
opinion. But the numbers are there I think.
Whatever the reasons, we don't seem to have enough plausible
candidates to provide reasonable turnover on the IESG (which,
personally, I think would be healthy).
=> I agree with the turnover point.
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...
=> With all due respect to those people, I think it's a shame
they feel like that. It seems like the selection decision is perceived
as a personal judgement by those people. Good people may not
get selected for a million reasons. I hate making blanket judgements
but this kind of attitude is probably not a healthy attitude for
an AD-to-be.
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.
=> Hmm. I guess the choice we need to make is whether we should
design the process to please some of the potential nominees or
to advance the community through openness and wide and diverse feedback.
The way we have it now, "key people" are seen as the people that
the nomcom should use to make their decisions. How "key people" only
can be trusted to make this decision is beyond me. In essense, we're
assuming that good technical people are good managers and good
judges of personalities and personal skills of nominees. This is
a dangerous assumption IMO and doesn't take into account that people
have diverse skills. Effectively, the process assumes that there are "good
people"
(good at everything) and "average people" (average at everything). And of course
"good people" can also recommend that the nomcom considers other "good
people's"
opinions about nominees. Can you see where this is going?
It can work for a small community but I doubt it would for a community this
size.
BTW, I'm not someone who was harmed by this process, on the contrary.
but I still don't trust it.
Hesham
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?
john
===========================================================
This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use
of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by others is strictly
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender
and delete all copies.
===========================================================
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf