On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 05:36 S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Toerless,
At 08:53 PM 13-07-2020, Toerless Eckert wrote:
>I disagree with this characterization. I am challenging the announced result
>from NomCom chair in the same way as you originally did. I understand the
>escalation process.
RFC 8713 (Section 4.17) allows any member to challenge the results of
the random selection. My interpretation is that it is within your
rights to challenge the announced results.
I don't understand the reasoning behind "the random selection should
have been done with..." as that was not provided in the "resolution" email.
There is a special past-past chair advisor. The explanation for that
is "this year is so strange". Making such an appointment was not
discussed during the evaluation of the document which was published
as RFC 8788. There isn't any information about which rule(s) was
used to make that appointment.
RFC8713 (sec 4.7) allows for additional advisors. Section 4.9 briefly describes it as well.
Additional info. RFC8713 also states in section 4.14 that all volunteers must identify their full names, email and primary company / affiliation when volunteering.
The random selection was run per section 4.17 which resulted in the final volunteer list announced on July 13, 2020 in accordance with the guidance on affiliation. My understanding is that affiliations are to be corrected as part of the list being published (often multiple times) during the list challenge period, if the data is not correct (e.g.. someone does not want to serve and/or there are changes in affiliation), that information should be corrected at that time. I recall last year, I had some folks self-identify during the challenge period and ask for affiliation adjustments (which is acceptable and needed).
In this case, one person in question was unable and/or did not notice the error. The person in question was working in a capacity for an affiliation different than what was stated on the list, which was material to the selection process.
The outcome we have now (as far as I can see), is in accordance with what would have occurred had the affiliation been corrected in the time allotted during the week the list(s) were made available.
List provided on June 28, 2020
List provided on July 2, 2020
It would be during this time, that an incorrect affiliation should have been corrected.
regards,
Victor K
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
