For what it's worth, candidates in professional organizations (IEEE, ACM, say)
routinely publish basic information about themselves, typically of two kinds:
* what have they done before (both within the organization as well as other
roles)
* vision for their position and the organization itself
Both are typically space-limited (around 200 words, I think) to force focus and
to avoid making this a "who can write a nicer autobiography" contest.
This is not sufficient and doesn't replace personal knowledge or one-on-one
interviews, but allows a broader range of people to comment. IEEE and ACM have
member votes, so the need is a bit different, but I don't think this is that
unusual nor particularly burdensome.
Henning
On Mar 6, 2013, at 4:37 PM, Eric Gray wrote:
Okay, thanks Bob. This makes sense...
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Hinden [mailto:bob(_dot_)hinden(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 4:36 PM
To: Eric Gray
Cc: Bob Hinden; dcrocker(_at_)bbiw(_dot_)net; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Nomcom off in the wilderness: Transport AD
Importance: High
Eric,
On Mar 6, 2013, at 12:59 PM, Eric Gray wrote:
Bob,
This confuses me. Are you saying that you would be more able to give
feedback on someone you don't know if you knew what they might have to say
about themselves?
I would think that - if you don't know somebody - you can't give
feedback on them (and that is precisely as it should be).
If I don't recognize them by name (and we don't publish their pictures), I
might remember something they did in a working group/plenary/etc. by reading
their summary.
Also, if they make statements about the future of the IETF that I agree with
or don't agree with, I can provide feedback on that.
Bob