On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Scott Brim <swb(_at_)internet2(_dot_)edu>
wrote:
On 03/11/13 14:41, Mary Barnes allegedly wrote:
This year's set of nominees was far more diverse than in the past and
yet the IESG will still be entirely male and entirely North
American/European. Of course, only people that bothered to use the
tool to input comments would see that. So, indeed the nomcom process
is part of the problem.
Mary: I believe you would agree with this but your language doesn't seem
to say so: just because the nomcom chose a less diverse set of nominees
from a more diverse set of candidates doesn't mean there is something
wrong with the nomcom or the nomcom process. It may be that this nomcom
did take diversity into account, and diversity was outweighed by other
factors that are at least as important. Do you have what you consider
to be proof that the nomcom didn't consider diversity?
[MB] I think I do - the process was quite inconsistent in terms of how
certain nominees were treated during interviews, etc. Also, as I said
in another email, Nomcom has a tough job as the process is based upon
them considering community input. When there is a bias in that input,
then of course, there may be bias in the process. [/MB]
I have direct
experience of at least a few nomcoms that did.
[MB] In my Nomcom experience I do not believe we did as good of a job
considering this as we should have. Some of the community comments
about female nominees were disrespectful and showed ignorance of the
fact that women are different - yes women are more likely to shed
tears when we are upset than to yell or curse or physically push
someone around (which I have been at these meetings). To suggest that
someone is not qualified to be an AD because they shed tears in a
contentious situation is unacceptable IMHO. Lack of respect for the
most basic diversity that exists both between genders and cultures is
a big problem IMHO. [/MB]
Are you looking for
quotas?
[MB] Absolutely NOT!!!
Do you think diversity is more important than e.g. demonstrated
ability to lead, at the top level?
[MB] Absolutely NOT!!! What I'm looking for is for IETF to recognize
that there may be a bias in how these decisions are made and to make a
conscientious decision to be aware of how this bias may impact their
decisions. I realize that this is a rather bold expectation given
that this is not a problem unique to IETF:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/25/science/bias-persists-against-women-of-science-a-study-says.html?_r=0
But, again, as an international open organization, I would expect the
IETF to at least make an effort.
[/MB]
Scott