Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal

> On Mar 26, 2015, at 4:38 PM, Fred Baker (fred) <fred(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> 
> wrote:
>
>
> > On Mar 26, 2015, at 9:09 AM, Adrian Farrel 
> > <adrian(_at_)olddog(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk> wrote:
> >
> > Getting this feedback through any channel, anonymized or otherwise, would be 
> > brilliant.
> It seems to me that the most straightforward way to handle that would be to 
> give the feedback on an incumbent to the incumbent. The way to handle 
> confidentiality, I would expect, is to ask the person commenting for one of 
> three instructions:
>
> 1) do not give this feedback to the incumbent
> 2) give this feedback to the incumbent in an anonymized form
> 3) give this feedback to the incumbent
>
> And note that only (3) gives the incumbent the opportunity to discuss the 
> feedback with the person that gave it. There is a part of me that wants to 
> not offer (3), but I can imagine it might make some people comfortable 
> sharing that would not otherwise be.
mumble. correction. "not to offer (1)".

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail