ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Nomcom off in the wilderness: Transport AD

2013-03-06 16:46:39
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Stephen Farrell
<stephen(_dot_)farrell(_at_)cs(_dot_)tcd(_dot_)ie> wrote:


On 03/06/2013 05:05 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
On 3/6/13 4:57 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
Candidates could choose to circulate the first part publicly.

I'm really, really against turning this into an election-like process

Speaking as someone who's filled in these things and both been
selected and not, but never been on nomcom, I'd be against making
'em public, so +1 to Melinda and others on that.

I think that'd lead to less honest/open answers as has been
pointed out. One example of that not noted so far is that I've
in the past told nomcom "pick the incumbent if he's re-upping"
and I think publishing responses would likely mean this would
either never be said or always be said and neither's as good as
it being said in private IMO.
[MB]  As someone whose filled out these things way more times than I
want to admit and never been appointed, but who has chaired nomcom, I
think making the questionnaires (at least a portion thereof) would add
value to the process.  Personally, I would question the motives of
someone that didn't think at least a portion of the questionnaire
could be shared with the community.   I took a quick look at the
questionnaire I filled out for this year's nomcom and there's only a
couple comments way down in the questionnaire that I would need to
edit to feel comfortable with making the questionnaire available to
the community - I would need to generalize some things with specific
details. The questionnaire is not the only way one should be providing
input to the Nomcom, and one could certainly include the comment you
mention in a portion of the questionnaire that wouldn't get published
or send them an email. [/MB]

That's just an example, I agree with pretty much all the
reasons folks have stated for not publishing these responses.

S.