On 30-Sep-22 15:41, John Levine wrote:
My understanding of my role as a liaison when I was one, and my reading of the relevant RFCs at least at the time, was absolutely that the
liaison had exactly the same obligations with respect to confidentiality as any voting member.
When I was the ISOC board liason to the nomcom, that was my
experience, too. I sat in on many of the interviews and a couple of
times took the notes so the nomcom members could concentrate on
talking with the candidate.
What I brought back to the ISOC board was one bit, whether I believed
that the nomcom had followed the process as it was supposed to do.
Unsurprisingly, the value of the bit was True.
When I held that liaison slot for the 2003-2004 NomCom, my report back to
the ISOC Board was a little more than one bit, since I summarised the way
that NomCom had operated, but *of course* there was nothing specific
about the nominees or other candidates. That would be a flagrant breach of
Rule #1.
As far as I know it's always been that way.
Brian
