Hi Rich, Adrian,
At 11:14 AM 25-01-2021, Salz, Rich wrote:
I looked at the 2020 and 2019 candidates, neither were
homogeneous. (I could not look earlier as the website just says
"closed" and I couldn't think of an easy mail archive search query
to find the list of names.) There was diversity, even if it didn't
really show up in the selections.
Whether the "input" lists is diverse or not depends on one's view of
what is described as the "community". There will likely be a change
in future as Brian and Stephen moved forward some changes to
"eligibility" which were shot down when I tried that many years ago.
The persons on the outside did not express their views on the
topic. One of the expectations for an IESG member [1] is that he/she
should "nurture new talent to fulfill IETF leadership roles in the
future". I doubt that the expectation was fulfilled or else this
thread would not exist.
Some of the selections were multi-term selections. One of the
drawbacks of such selections is that it fosters a culture in which
the decision-makers stick to policies even if those policies are working badly.
At 03:28 PM 24-01-2021, Adrian Farrel wrote:
I think debate has gone back and forwards over the years about the early
announcement of candidates who have been nominated and/or who have accepted
nominations. One argument has been that seeing a small set of nominees might
prompt someone to stand, or that seeing the potential appointees might
incentivise others to stand. Conversely, the argument can be made that
seeing the name of someone you think is half-way reasonable is good enough
reason to not stand. Furthermore, a person might think they stand no chance
against another candidate and so be disinclined to put their name forward,
which might suggest not announcing any names until nominations close.
Those issues were discussed as part of the "open secret" list of
nominees discussion. Some nominees publicly announced that they were
putting their name prior to that discussion.
There could be a perception that one has to fit a profile to be a
viable candidate for selection, e.g. employed by one of the companies
which usually field nominees.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
1. There is a tendency for a nominating process discussion to be
focused on IESG selections even though there is a significant number
of positions which require other expertise.
